*  5?  -  ; 


BS 


\ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/morallifeofhebreOOsmit 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF 
THE  HEBREWS 


\ 


j 

i 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  PRESS 
CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 


THE  BAKER  &  TAYLOR  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK 


THE  CAMBRIDGE  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

LONDON 

THE  MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA 

TOKYO,  OSAKA,  KYOTO,  EUKUOKA,  SENDAI 

THE  MISSION  BOOK  COMPANY 


SHANGHAI 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF 
THE  HEBREWS 


By  / 

J.  M.  Powis  Smith 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  PRESS 
CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 


Copyright  1923  By 
The  University  of  Chicago 


All  Rights  Reserved 


Published  April  1923 


Composed  and  Printed  By 
The  University  of  Chicago  Press 
Chicago,  Illinois,  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 


This  book  undertakes  to  present  a  history  of  the 
development  of  Hebrew  morals  as  recorded  in  the  Old 
Testament.  That  there  was  a  historical  development 
none  can  well  deny.  The  aim  here  is  to  present  that 
history  as  objectively  as  possible.  The  facts  are  for 
the  most  part  left  to  speak  for  themselves.  The 
literary  sources  containing  the  record  of  this  moral 
progress  are  treated  in  the  probable  order  of  their 
origin. 

The  presentation  might  have  been  made  more  vivid 
and  vital  if  space  had  permitted  a  closer  integration  of 
the  moral  practices  and  ideals  with  the  contemporary 
social  and  economic  conditions  amid  which  they  func¬ 
tioned.  The  social  aspects  of  ethical  problems  and 
situations  have  not  been  wholly  ignored.  But  there  is 
still  need  of,  and  room  for,  a  good  scientific  handbook  on 
the  sociology  of  the  Hebrews. 

The  Hebrew  point  of  view  always  coupled  morals 
with  religion.  They  were  one  and  inseparable.  The 
outstanding  characteristic  of  Hebrew  religion  is  the  fact 
that  it  gave  free  course  to  the  moral  forces  latent  within 
it.  None  of  the  Hebrew  thinkers  ever  separated  morals 
from  religion.  It  was  the  moral  passion  of  the  Hebrew 
religion  that  gave  it  its  dynamic.  Ethics  and  theology 
advanced  together,  each  supporting  the  other.  The 
great  contribution  of  the  prophets  was  that  they  ethicized 
the  religion  of  their  people.  Their  crowning  achieve¬ 
ment  was  ethical  monotheism. 

•  • 

Vll 


PREFACE 


•  •  • 

Vlll 

The  charge  of  utilitarianism  may  be  made  against 
Hebrew  ethics  with  some  force.  But  this  is  a  necessary 
stage  in  the  development  of  any  system  of  morals.  One 
of  the  earliest  human  motives  is  the  desire  for  success 
and  prosperity;  and  it  is  a  proof  of  profound  spiritual 
insight  when  a  people’s  leaders  use  this  desire  in  such  a 
way  as  to  further  moral  ends.  But  the  Hebrew  saints 
outgrew  this  primary  stage  in  their  ethical  training  and 
came  to  the  point  where  they  loved  the  moral  life  for  its 
own  sake  and  were  willing  to  risk  their  lives  in  defense 
of  their  characters.  The  moral  achievement  of  a  people, 
or  of  an  individual,  is  to  be  measured  not  merely  by  the 
goal  at  which  it  arrives,  but  also  from  the  point  at  which 
it  starts.  The  distance  won  in  the  struggle  is  the  test  of 
moral  stamina.  Nothing  is  more  noteworthy  than  the 
great  progress  made  by  the  Hebrews  in  their  thousand 
years  of  moral  discipline.  It  is  doubtful  if  any  people 
ever  traveled  farther  in  so  short  a  time.  No  moralist 
need  apologize  for  the  ethics  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Read  in  the  light  of  history,  the  story  of  the  Hebrew 
moral  life  is  one  of  constantly  expanding  ideals,  with  the 
slow  and  heavy  movement  of  the  masses  being  constantly 
stimulated  by  the  spur  of  noble-minded  leadership. 
These  men  of  spiritual  insight  still  point  the  way  of 
moral  attainment  to  us  who  would  search  for  the  same 
great  ends.  The  social  passion  of  the  prophets,  the  moral 
discernment  of  the  sages,  and  the  spiritual  vision  of  the 
psalmists  still  challenge  admiration.  The  words  and 
deeds  of  these  men  have  not  lost  their  power.  They 
will  always  stir  the  minds  and  inspire  the  hearts  of  lovers 
of  righteousness. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


/ 


PART  I.  THE  MORALS  OF  PRE-PROPHETIC 

ISRAEL 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.  The  Earliest  Historical  Narratives  ....  3 

II.  The  Traditions  of  Early  Israel . 30 

III.  The  Morals  of  the  Early  Codes . 49 

PART  II.  THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PROPHETIC 

PERIOD 

IV.  The  Prophets  of  the  Eighth  Century  ...  73 

V.  The  Prophets  of  the  Seventh  Century  .  .  .100 


VI.  The  Deuteronomic  School . 123 

VII.  The  Problem  of  the  Exiles . 149 

PART  III.  THE  MORALS  OF  JUDAISM 

VIII.  The  Program  of  Judaism . 167 

IX.  The  Return  to  Reality . 187 

X.  The  Morals  of  the  Egyptian  Jews . 207 

XI.  The  Morals  of  the  Psalms . 220 

XII.  The  Moral  Maxims  of  the  Sages . 245 

XIII.  A  Saint  under  Fire . 264 


XIV.  The  Meaning  of  Life  and  the  Light  of  Love  .  278 

XV.  The  Moral  Standards  of  Legalism  ....  292 


XVI.  A  Struggle  for  Existence . 302 

XVII.  Some  Concluding  Observations . 319 

Index . 331 


IX 


PART  I 


THE  MORALS  OF  PRE-PROPHETIC  ISRAEL 


i 


CHAPTER  I 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES 

i.  The  aim  of  Part  I. — The  term  “pre-prophetic”  as 
here  understood  is  applied  to  that  period  of  Hebrew 
history  which  preceded  the  work  of  the  great  prophets 
of  the  eighth  century  b.c.,  viz.,  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah, 
and  Micah.  No  attempt  is  made  here  to  arrange  the 
literary  sources  of  information  for  that  period  in  chron¬ 
ological  order.  Any  such  arrangement  is  necessarily 
largely  determined  by  subjective  considerations  and  fails 
to  command  general  assent.  Nor  is  any  effort  made  to 
follow  the  course  of  historical  events  within  the  period 
at  all  closely;  for  the  problems  besetting  the  study  of 
the  history  of  this  period  are  too  numerous,  too  complex, 
and  too  recently  discovered  to  make  any  general  agree¬ 
ment  upon  these  matters  possible  at  present.  Our  aim, 
in  any  case,  is  to  set  forth  the  ethical  standards  reflected 
in  the  body  of  literature  that  comes  from  this  early  period 
of  Hebrew  history;  and  that  literature  for  the  most  part 
belongs  to  the  latter  end  of  the  period  in  question.  It 
records  much  of  the  ethical  practices  and  ideals  of  more 
ancient  times,  but  it  rarely  fails  to  make  clear  its  own 
moral  judgment  upon  those  times  either  by  direct  state¬ 
ment  or  by  inference;  and  it  is  this  evaluation  of  this 
early  literature  with  which  we  must  satisfy  ourselves. 
This  means  that  we  shall  not  expect  to  learn  what  were 
the  moral  aims  and  motives  of  an  Abraham,  a  Jacob, 
or  even  a  Moses,  but  rather  look  for  the  standards 
reflected  in  the  stories  about  them  as  they  were  current 


3 


4 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


in  the  closing  century  of  the  pre-prophetic  period.  For 
convenience  of  treatment  the  literature  of  this  period  is 
here  classified  in  three  groups  of  documents,  to  wit: 
(i)  the  oldest  historical  material  in  Judges,  Samuel,  and 
I  Kings;  (2)  the  ancient  traditions  recorded  in  the  J 
and  E  documents  of  the  Hexateuch;  and  (3)  the  earliest 
Hebrew  codes  of  law. 

2.  The  fluidity  of  early  Hebrew  ethics. — It  should  be 
noted  first  of  all  that  the  moral  standards  of  this  early 
period  were  in  part  an  inheritance  from  a  pre-Canaanitish 
nomadic  life  in  the  desert  and  in  part  the  product  of  the 
succeeding  life  amid  the  agricultural  and  commercial  civ¬ 
ilization  of  Canaan.  But  these  two  types  of  life  must  not 
be  thought  of  as  lying  on  either  side  of  a  chronological 
line  of  demarcation.  On  the  contrary,  the  fact  is  that, 
for  a  century  or  two,  in  all  probability,  the  life  in  Canaan 
was  kept  in  closest  contact  with  the  life  fresh  from  the 
desert.  That  is  to  say,  the  settlement  of  Israel  in 
Canaan  was  a  long-drawn-out  process  rather  than  a 
single  dramatic  experience.  Some  Hebraic  clans  found 
entry  into  Palestine  at  least  as  early  as  the  Tel-el- 
Amarna  period  (i.e.,  the  fourteenth  century  b.c.),  and  if 
Hebrew  traditions  may  be  trusted,  some  came  in  a  few 
centuries  earlier.  These  early  comers  were  reinforced 
from  time  to  time  by  new  instalments  from  the  desert. 
But  the  last  lot  of  immigrants  did  not  arrive  until  the  end 
of  the  thirteenth  or  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century  b.c. 
These  were  the  clans  who  escaped  from  Egypt  and  with 
other  groups  took  possession  of  Judah  and  the  south.  All 
this  means  that  the  customs  and  ideals  of  the  old  set¬ 
tlers  in  Canaan  were  from  time  to  time  brought  face  to 
face  with  the  standards  of  the  simpler  life  of  the  desert 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES 


5 


as  represented  by  the  latest  comers  from  that  quarter. 
Inevitably  such  a  situation  involves  a  conflict  of  customs 
and  aims  which  tends  to  keep  social  and  individual  ideals 
in  a  state  of  flux.  Such  conditions  are  not  favorable 
to  a  rapid  crystallization  of  practice  and  a  speedy  fixa¬ 
tion  of  standards. 

3.  A  change  of  environment. — The  conditions  amid 
which  the  early  Hebrew  life  in  Canaan  was  carried  on 
need  to  be  borne  in  mind  as  we  survey  the  crude  ethical 
practices  of  this  period.  The  Hebrews  were  newcomers 
in  the  midst  of  an  old  civilization  of  which  they  them¬ 
selves  knew  scarcely  anything.  There  was  more  or  less 
hostility  all  the  time,  and  much  of  the  time  open  war¬ 
fare,  between  them  and  their  Canaanitish  neighbors, 
who  did  not  welcome  these  intruders.  They  had  to 
learn  an  almost  wholly  new  manner  of  life  in  Canaan. 
The  economic  conditions  of  the  desert  and  the  nomad 
no  longer  obtained.  With  so  much  new  to  be  learned 
and  so  much  of  the  old  to  be  unlearned,  it  ought  not  to 
be  surprising  if  their  earlier  moral  and  social  standards 
should  break  down  to  some  extent,  before  new  social 
customs  and  institutions  had  been  developed  to  replace 
them.  The  Hebrews  coming  in  from  the  simple  life 
of  the  nomad  in  the  desert  were  confronted  by  all  the 
limitations  and  trials  that  a  rich  and  highly  developed 
Culture  presents  to  primitive  people.  They  were  like 
the  country  boy  coming  to  earn  his  living  in  the  big  city ; 
it  will  either  make  or  break  him.  It  naturally  required 
time  for  the  Hebrews  to  adjust  themselves  to  the  new 
environment  and  to  learn  to  use  it  wisely  and  not  abuse 
it.  The  wonder  is  not  that  there  is  so  much  of  the  crude 
and  primitive  and  sensuous  in  the  morals  of  early  Israel, 


6 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


but  that  the  soul  of  the  people  persisted  in  seeking  after 
the  higher  things  and  gradually  shook  off  these  lower 
materialistic  habits  and  developed  for  itself  a  moral 
life  that  has  held  the  admiration  of  mankind.  It  would 
have  been  so  much  simpler  and  easier  to  have  sunk  to 
the  level  of  their  Canaanitish  neighbors ! 

4.  A  lack  of  social  unity. — Still  another  aspect  of  the 
situation  must  be  mentioned.  The  struggle  for  the  com¬ 
plete  possession  of  the  land  was  long  drawn  out.  It 
might  be  better  to  say  the  struggles,  for  the  process  of 
conquest  was  not  carried  on  in  any  unified  way.  There 
was  no  massing  of  the  Israelites  as  a  whole  against  the 
Canaanites.  It  was  rather  a  piecemeal  process.  Each 
clan  or  group  of  clans  made  its  own  way  and  fought  its 
own  fight.  The  story  of  the  migration  of  the  Danites  told 
in  Judges,  chapters  17  and  18,  is  an  illustration  of  the 
way  in  which  the  clans  obtained  their  foothold.  There 
was  thus  no  recognized  authority  over  all  Israel  until 
the  days  of  the  Kingdom  under  Saul.  Each  group  was 
a  law  unto  itself.  Indeed,  a  later  writer  describing  the 
life  of  the  period  says,  “each  man  did  that  which  was 
right  in  his  own  eyes.”1  There  was  no  pronounced 
and  authoritative  public  sentiment  throughout  all  Israel 
to  act  as  a  controlling  influence  upon  the  conduct  of 
smaller  groups  and  of  individuals.  Then,  too,  the  organ¬ 
ization  of  the  clan  itself  which  had  been  worked  out  under 
nomadic  conditions  would  have  to  undergo  radical  trans¬ 
formation  under  the  agricultural  conditions  of  the  life 
in  Canaan  and  many  of  the  old  customs  and  restrictions 
would  be  forced  to  give  way;  and  that,  too,  before  the 
newer  life  had  fully  worked  out  its  own  means  of  social 

*Judg.  17:6;  21:5. 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES 


7 


control.  Such  a  general  situation  furnishes  an  ideal 
background  for  cunning,  trickery,  deceit,  and  violence, 
and  these  unsocial  phenomena  are  present  in  abundance. 

5.  The  morals  of  Yahweh. — In  presenting  the  ethical 
materials  found  in  the  oldest  sources  in  Judges,  Samuel, 
and  I  Kings,  we  may  well  consider  first  of  all  the  ethical 
attitudes  ascribed  to  Yahweh,  Israel’s  God.  It  is  a 
generally  recognized  fact  that  men  first  work  out  among 
themselves  their  own  rules  of  procedure  and  ideals  of 
conduct,  and  then  find  sanction  for  them  in  the  mind 
of  God.  Men  first  become  ethical  themselves;  then 
they  cease  to  think  unethically  of  God.  Consequently, 
to  discover  the  accepted  standards  of  an  age  or  a  group, 
we  need  only  examine  its  conception  of  God,  for  it  will 
reflect  most  of  the  higher  ideals  of  his  worshipers. 

The  conception  of  Yahweh  in  early  Israel  was  not 
rich  in  ethical  content.  The  stories  in  the  oldest  docu¬ 
ments  credit  him  with  sentiments  and  purposes  that 
are  very  human,  and  indeed  in  some  cases,  quite  inhuman, 
as  judged  by  modern  standards.  He  does  not  shrink 
from  resorting  to  the  use  of  wicked  agencies  in  order  to 
bring  to  pass  his  purposes.  We  are  told,  for  example, 
that  “God  sent  an  evil  spirit  between  Abimelech  and 
the  men  of  Shechem,  so  that  the  men  of  Shechem  dealt 
treacherously  with  Abimelech”  (Judg.  9:23  f.).  All  the 
destruction  and  slaughter  that  followed  were  brought 
about  by  God  in  order  that  the  law  of  blood-revenge 
might  be  satisfied  (cf.  Judg.  9 : 56  f.).  In  similar  fashion, 
the  wickedness  of  the  sons  of  Eli  was  in  accordance  with 
the  divine  plan,  “because  Yahweh  would  slay  them” 
(I  Sam.  2:25).  Saul’s  malady  was  due  to  “an  evil  spirit 
from  Yahweh”  (I  Sam.  16:15  ff.),  which  pushed  him  to 


8 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  point  of  attempting  to  murder  David  (I  Sam.  19:9). 
David’s  census  of  all  Israel  was  inspired  by  Yahweh  and 
yet  it  angered  Yahweh  that  David  should  have  yielded 
to  his  suggestion  (II  Sam.  24 : 1  ff .) .  Samuel  is  advised 
by  Yahweh  to  camouflage  his  visit  to  Bethlehem  for 
the  purpose  of  finding  a  new  king  by  declaring  that  he 
goes  there  in  order  to  conduct  a  sacrifice  (I  Sam.  16:2). 
David  conceives  it  to  be  quite  within  the  range  of 
possibility  that  Yahweh  should  have  stirred  up  Saul  to 
seek  his  life.  But  in  that  case  Yahweh  ought  to  accept 
an  atoning  sacrifice  and  be  satisfied.  However,  “if  it 
be  men  that  have  stirred  thee  up  fi.e.,  Saul]  against  me, 
cursed  be  they  before  Yahweh”  (I  Sam.  26:19).  That 
is  to  say,  what  would  have  been  perfectly  legitimate  for 
Yahweh  is  cursedly  immoral  for  men.  Yahweh  is  above 
all  law.  Yahweh  makes  the  treacherous  council  of 
Hushai  to  prevail  with  Absalom  in  order  that  his  rebel¬ 
lious  enterprise  may  fail  (II  Sam.  17:14).  Yahweh 
raises  up  enemies  against  Solomon  to  punish  him  for 
his  recognition  of  other  gods  (I  Kings  11:14,  23). 

6.  The  personal  responsibility  of  Yahweh  for  deeds  of 
blood. — Not  only  does  Yahweh  work  out  his  purposes 
through  evil  agencies,  but  at  times  he  takes  matters  into 
his  own  hands.  He  smote  seventy  men  of  Beth-shemesh 
for  their  sacrilegious  curiosity  in  looking  into  the  sacred 
ark  (I  Sam.  6:19).  Uzzah  was  slain  on  the  spot  by 
Yahweh  for  his  profane  touch  upon  the  ark,  even  though 
it  was  an  involuntary  act  due  to  his  desire  to  keep  the 
ark  from  injury  (II  Sam.  6:6,  7).  Nabal,  the  churlish 
farmer  who  refused  David’s  request  for  a  material  reward, 
was  smitten  of  Yahweh  so  that  he  died,  though  from  our 
point  of  view  David  had  little  moral  right  to  demand  pay 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES 


9 


for  having  kept  his  men  from  molesting  Nabal’s  flocks 
and  herds  (I  Sam.  25:38).  Yahweh’s  insistence  upon 
the  satisfaction  of  blood-revenge  was  so  pronounced 
that  he  sent  a  famine  upon  all  Israel  because  Saul’s 
slaughter  of  the  Gibeonites  had  not  been  avenged. 
Seven  of  Saul’s  descendants  were  handed  over  to  the 
Gibeonites  and  were  hung  up  before  Yahweh  in  Gibeah; 
then  his  wrath  was  placated  (II  Sam.  21 : 1-14).  Indeed, 
Yahweh  seems  to  have  had  a  craving  for  blood,  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  thought  of  these  times.  Samuel  hewed  Agag 
in  pieces  before  Yahweh  at  the  altar  (I  Sam.  15:32  f.). 
When  Jephthah  made  his  rash  vow  and  his  eyes  met  the 
desolating  sight  of  his  only  child  coming  forth  from  his 
house  to  greet  him  upon  his  return  from  victory,  there 
was  no  thought  of  any  possibility  of  escape  from  the 
fulfilment  of  the  literal  terms  of  the  vow,  and  in  due 
course  the  young  woman  was  sacrificed  to  Yahweh 
(Judg.  11:30-40).  The  same  rigid  adherence  to  the 
terms  of  an  unwise  vow  nearly  cost  Jonathan  his  life  at 
the  hands  of  his  fanatical  father  (I  Sam.  14:24-45). 
The  fact  that  the  people  protested  and  saved  the  hero 
of  the  day  is  evidence  of  a  developing  ethical  sense.  On 
this  occasion,  common  sense  and  gratitude  won  a  straight 
victory  over  tradition  and  dogma. 

7.  Oaths ,  curses ,  and  vows. — Another  way  in  which 
the  God-idea  throws  light  upon  ethical  conceptions  is 
in  the  matter  of  oaths,  curses,  and  vows.  A  man  takes 
an  oath  in  order  that  confidence  in  his  integrity  may  be 
reinforced  by  bringing  the  whole  contract  under  the 
1  protection  of  Yahweh.  It  is  clear  that  he  himself  may 
not  be  trusted  to  fulfil  his  word  or  to  tell  the  truth  and 
nothing  but  the  truth.  Therefore  he  must  put  himself 


IO 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


under  bonds  to  keep  his  word.  If  he  fails,  the  wrath  of 
Yahweh  will  descend  upon  him  with  appalling  results. 
The  fear  of  this  holds  him  true  to  his  pledge  (Judg. 
11:10,  n;  21:1-18;  I  Kings  8:31  f.).  An  interesting 
illustration  of  the  effectiveness  of  such  a  fear  is  fur¬ 
nished  in  the  story  of  the  man  Micah  who  stole  a  large 
sum  of  money  from  his  mother  (Judg.  17:2!).  The 
mother,  perhaps  suspecting  her  son,  uttered  a  curse  upon 
the  thief  in  her  boy’s  presence.  The  fear  of  that  curse 
so  worked  upon  his  conscience  that  he  confessed  the 
crime  and  restored  the  money,  in  order  to  escape  the 
penalty  of  the  malediction.  Another  curse  that  is 
instructive  is  the  one  already  mentioned  which  Saul 
uttered  on  the  day  of  battle.  Jonathan  unwittingly 
violated  its  terms  and  Yahweh  at  once  manifested  his 
displeasure  by  refusing  to  respond  to  Saul’s  efforts  to 
secure  an  oracle  as  to  the  further  course  of  the  campaign 
(I  Sam.  14:36  ff.).  Jonathan  was  innocent  of  any  evil 
intent,  but  the  curse  must  operate  just  the  same.  The 
people  were  here  more  ethical  in  their  reaction  than  the 
priests  and  the  king.  Still  another  vow  is  that  by  which 
Hannah  succeeds  in  persuading  Yahweh  to  grant  her  a 
child.  The  child  is  to  be  dedicated  to  Yahweh  as  a 
Nazirite  as  long  as  he  lives  (I  Sam.  1 : 11).  Asa  reward 
for  this  surrender  of  her  son,  Hannah  is  given  five  more 
children  (I  Sam.  2:20).  This  is  a  very  simple  and  human 
interpretation  of  the  situation  on  the  part  of  the  record. 
In  another  situation,  in  which  a  great  oath  was  taken 
by  the  men  of  Israel  that  none  of  them  would  give  the 
surviving  men  of  Benjamin  any  of  their  daughters  to 
wife,  the  oath  was  evaded  by  a  bit  of  Jesuitical  reasoning 
which  kept  the  letter  of  the  oath  but  broke  the  spirit 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  II 


of  it  all  to  bits.  They  told  the  Benjamites  where  and 
when  they  could  seize  some  unsuspecting  maidens  whose 
fathers  were  not  informed  of  the  proposed  raid.  There¬ 
fore,  nobody  gave  his  daughter  to  a  Benjamite  husband 
and  the  letter  of  the  oath  was  conserved  (Judg.  21 : 1-22). 

8.  Yahweh  is  true  to  his  word. — Two  more  cases 
exhaust  the  material  in  these  sources  that  offers  informa¬ 
tion  as  to  the  ethical  side  of  the  idea  of  God.  When 
the  tribe  of  Dan  was  migrating  to  its  new  home  in  the 
north,  it  stopped  on  the  way  for  a  call  upon  Micah  of 
Ephraim,  from  whom  they  took,  despite  his  protest,  not 
only  his  family  priest,  but  also  his  god.  This  stolen 
image  was  installed  in  the  new  shrine  at  Dan  and  was 
ministered  to  by  the  kidnapped  priest.  Yahweh,  notwith¬ 
standing  this  burglary,  seems  to  have  accepted  the  ser¬ 
vice  of  the  robbers  and  the  use  of  the  stolen  goods  without 
protest,  and  to  have  prospered  Dan  in  its  mission  of  exter¬ 
mination  (Judg.,  chaps.  17  and  18).  The  second  episode 
reflects  a  little  light  in  our  ethical  darkness.  After  Saul 
had  aroused  the  wrath  of  Yahweh  by  failing  to  carry 
out  his  orders  as  to  the  Amalekites,  Saul  is  brought  to 
realize  the  gravity  of  his  offense  by  Samuel  and  begs  for 
forgiveness.  But  he  is  met  by  a  stern  denial,  and  the 
content  of  the  refusal  puts  Yahweh  upon  a  higher  level 
than  he  has  occupied  thus  far:  “The  Glory  of  Israel 
will  not  lie  nor  repent;  for  he  is  not  man  that  he  should 
repent”  (I  Sam.  15:29).  The  contrast  here  is  between 
the  deceit  and  fickleness  of  man  and  the  integrity  and 
steadfastness  of  God.  When  God  has  announced  a 
course  of  action,  he  can  be  depended  upon  to  adhere  to  it. 

9.  The  Hebrew  attitude  toward  foreigners. — We  turn 
now  from  consideration  of  the  ethical  aspect  of  the  idea 


12 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


of  God  to  observation  of  the  ethical  relations  among  men.^ 
First  of  all  we  shall  take  up  the  attitude  of  Israel  and  the 
Israelites  toward  foreign  nations  and  individuals.  Here 
it  will  at  once  appear  that  a  foreigner  has  few  rights  that 
an  Israelite  is  bound  to  respect.  The  ordinary  claims 
of  humanity  are  largely  ignored  in  dealings  with  non- 
Israelite  groups  and  individuals.  Particularly  is  this 
true  of  Israel’s  attitude  toward  Canaanites.  When 
Israel  became  sufficiently  strong,  the  Canaanites  were 
reduced  to  slavery  (Judg.  1:28;  I  Kings  9:20!).  A 
defeated  king  was  mutilated  (Judg.  1:6).  The  whole 
population  of  Laish  was  taken  by  surprise  and  ruthlessly 
slaughtered  (Judg.  18:7  ffi,  27).  The  Song  of  Deborah 
(Judg.,  chap.  5  ;  cf.  chap.  4)  revels  in  a  fierce  joy  over  the 
downfall  of  the  foe  and  gives  Jael  the  highest  praise 
among  women  for  her  assassination  of  Sisera.  The  prose 
narrative  of  the  same  event  intensifies  the  savagery  of  the 
deed  by  adding  the  fact  that  Jabin  was  a  friend  of  Jael’s 
husband,  so  that  Sisera  had  every  right  to  expect  kindly 
treatment  at  Jael’s  tent.  Worse  still,  Jael  admitted  him 
to  her  tent,  gave  him  refreshing  drink,  thus  bringing  him 
under  the  protection  of  the  guest  law,  and  yet  murdered 
him  in  his  sleep.  The  prose  narrative  is  generally  held 
to  be  later  than  the  poem  and  it  seems  to  reflect  a  fading 
out  of  consciousness  of  the  old  guest  rights  of  the  desert. 
David  put  whole  communities  to  the  edge  of  the  sword 
that  were  friendly  to  the  Philistines,  and  then  went  back 
to  Gath  and  lied  barefacedly  to  Achish  as  to  the 
territory  in  which  his  campaigns  had  been  conducted 
(I  Sam.  27:9-11).  Amalekites  and  Moabites  were  ruth¬ 
lessly  slaughtered  (I  Sam.  15:3,  8,  32,  33;  II  Sam.  8:2) 
and  Ammonites  were  reduced  to  slavery  (II  Sam. 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  13 


12:31).  At  an  earlier  day,  Ehud  assassinated  Eglon, 
king  of  Moab,  an  oppressor  of  Israel,  and  was  evidently 
regarded  as  a  hero  by  his  people  for  so  doing  (Judg., 
chap.  3).  But  gratitude  toward  the  Kenites  for  past 
favors  led  Israel  to  spare  them  from  the  slaughter  of 
the  Amalekites  with  whom  they  dwelt  (I  Sam.  15:6). 
Sporadically  there  were  periods  when  kindly  feelings 
seem  to  have  prevailed  between  Israel  and  Moab.  At 
least,  when  David  fled  from  Saul,  he  left  his  aged  par¬ 
ents  under  the  protection  of  the  king  of  Moab,  before 
betaking  himself  to  refuge  in  the  cave  of  Adullam  (I  Sam. 
22:3,  4).  And  more  surprising  still,  perhaps,  when 
David’s  fortunes  were  at  a  low  ebb  and  he  was  abandon¬ 
ing  his  own  capital  before  the  advance  of  his  rebel  son, 
the  king  of  the  Ammonites  gave  him  kindly  succor 
(II  Sam.  17:2 7-29) .  With  Solomon,  leagues  with  foreign  ) 
peoples  became  the  rule  rather  than  the  exception,  a 
quid  pro  quo  being  the  basis  of  agreement  (I  Kings 
5 : 5-1 1 ;  10:2 5-29) .  Evidently  the  geographical  position 
of  Canaan,  constituting  as  it  did  the  great  highway 
between  the  eastern  and  western  centers  of  civilization, 
was  effecting  a  change  in  the  attitude  of  the  erstwhile 
nomads,  so  that  they  were  coming  to  recognize  the 
necessity  of  coming  to  terms  with  their  neighbors 
instead  of  living  in  a  state  of  perpetual  hostility  in  which 
every  Hebrew’s  hand  was  lifted  against  every  alien. 

10.  Social  solidarity. — In  turning  our  eyes  upon  the 
ethical  attitudes  and  principles  operative  within  the 
Israelitish  circle,  we  shall  at  once  discover  that  the  con¬ 
ception  of  the  relation  of  the  individual  to  the  social 
order  was  essentially  different  from  the  view  of  that  rela¬ 
tionship  in  our  own  age.  For  us,  in  theory  at  least,  each 


14 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


individual  stands  or  falls  upon  his  own  merits.  Our 
social  order  is  individualistically  organized.  For  the 
early  Hebrews,  the  individual  had  only  partially  emerged 
from  the  social  group  within  which  he  originated.  The 
solidarity  of  the  family  or  group  was  the  outstanding 
fact.  We  shall  therefore  find  group  morality  and  family 
ethics  functioning  to  a  considerable  extent  instead  of  an 
individualistic  ethic.  In  Judges,  Samuel,  and  I  Kings, 
there  are  but  two  or  three  clear  cases  of  this  sort  of 
thing,  but  these  are  enough  to  attest  the  operation 
of  the  solidarity  principle  in  early  Israel,  especially  when 
we  find  further  evidence  in  J  and  E  (see  chap,  ii),  and 
discover  also  that  the  principle  continues  in  force  to  a 
considerable  degree  all  through  Hebrew  and  Jewish 
history.  One  of  the  illustrations  of  this  conception  is 
supplied  by  the  story  of  the  hanging  of  Saul’s  descendants 
(II  Sam.  2 1 : 1-14) .  The  offense  of  slaying  the  Gibeonites 
was  committed  by  Saul  or  upon  his  orders.  Yahweh 
sends  punishment  for  the  crime  upon  all  Israel  and  that 
too  after  Saul’s  death.  Final  satisfaction  is  given  the 
Gibeonites,  and  atonement  for  the  crime  is  made  by 
hanging  up  before  Yahweh  two  of  Saul’s  sons  and  five 
of  his  grandsons.  The  ends  of  justice  are  therefore  met 
when  the  family  of  the  offender  is  punished,  even  though 
the  offender  himself  escape.  Again,  David’s  sin  in  taking 
a  census  of  his  people  is  visited  upon  the  heads  of  the 
people  and  not  upon  David  himself  directly  (II  Sam. 
24:1  ff.).  In  these  cases  the  unit  dealt  with  is  not  the 
individual,  but  the  group  to  which  he  belongs.  The 
individual  involves  the  group  in  the  results  of  his  crime. 
The  group  has  sinned  through  a  member;  therefore  the 
group  must  suffer  punishment.  Nor  is  it  at  all  essen- 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  1 5 


tial  that  that  member  of  the  group  who  committed  the 
offense  be  punished  rather  than  some  other  member  or 
members.  The  social  body  has  offended  and  that  body 
must  suffer — the  particular  member  of  the  body  that 
suffers  is  a  matter  of  slight  consequence.  When  one 
member  suffers,  all  the  members  suffer  with  it. 

11.  The  conception  of  woman. — An  infallible  index  to 
the  character  of  the  society  of  any  age  is  furnished  by 
the  life  of  its  women  and  the  esteem  accorded  to  women 
and  the  family.  On  this  subject  there  is  considerable 
information  in  our  sources.  The  names  of  Deborah, 
Jael,  Hannah,  Bathsheba,  Michal,  Abigail,  Abishag  the 
Shunammite,  Tamar,  the  “  Witch  of  Endor,”  and  the 
“wise  woman  of  Tekoa”  bring  up  a  wide  range  of 
pictures,  pleasing  and  displeasing.  Woman,  apparently, 
played  no  small  part  in  the  social  and  even  in  the  political 
life  of  the  times.  Nor  were  her  morals  appreciably  differ¬ 
ent  from  the  morals  of  masculine  society.  Polygamy  was 
the  order  of  the  day.  Samuel’s  mother  was  one  of  two 
wives  (I  Sam.  1:2);  Gideon’s  father  had  “many  wives” 
(Judg.  8:30);  David  had  eight  wives  who  are  individu¬ 
ally  mentioned  (I  Sam.  18:20,  27;  25:39,  43;  II  Sam. 
3:2-5,  13;  11:27;  I  Kings  1:1-4),  and  he  married  yet 
more  wives  in  Jerusalem  (II  Sam.  5:13-16),  and  when 
he  left  Jerusalem  in  haste,  fleeing  from  Absalom,  he  left 
ten  concubines  behind  him  in  the  city  (II  Sam.  15:16). 
Solomon’s  uxorious  proclivities  are  notorious  (I  Kings 
11:1-3).  Of  course,  Solomon  must  be  given  credit  for 
political  and  commercial  aims  to  the  accomplishment  of 
which  the  marriages  with  foreign  princesses  were  a 
necessary  means.  Inherent  in  the  system  of  polygamy 
are  certain  evils  which  are  exemplified  in  the  family 


i6 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


life  of  this  period.  There  was  rivalry  and  enmity  be- 
u^tween  the  wives  of  Elkanah  (I  Sam.  i :  5-8) .  The  family 
tie  among  the  children  of  different  wives  was  very 
weak.  Gideon’s  son  Abimelech  slew  all  but  one  of  his 
half-brothers,  seventy  in  number,  and  set  himself  up  as 
king  of  Shechem  (Judg.  9:5,  6).  Amnon  violated  his 
half-sister  Tamar  and  was  slain  for  it  by  her  full  brother, 
Absalom  (II  Sam.,  chap.  13).  Indeed  he  might  have 
married  her,  half-sister  as  she  was  (II  Sam.  13:13). 
Adonijah  and  Solomon  were  rivals  for  the  succession  to 
David’s  throne,  and  the  younger  won  through  the 
influence  of  the  fascinating  Bathsheba  and  the  prophet 
Nathan  (I  Kings  1:11-40).  Ultimately  Adonijah  was 
slain  by  Solomon  under  suspicion  of  plotting  to  seize  the 
throne  after  David’s  death  (I  Kings  2:17-35).  Faith¬ 
fulness  to  the  marriage  bond  did  not  weigh  heavily  upon 
husbands,  and  a  general  looseness  of  sexual  relations 
prevailed.  Samson  seems  to  have  contracted  what  is 
known  as  a  sadika  marriage  with  a  Philistine  woman 
(Judg.  15:1),  i.e.,  a  marriage  by  the  terms  of  which 
the  woman  stays  with  her  own  people  where  she  is  visited 
from  time  to  time  by  her  husband,  who  makes  sure  of 
his  welcome  by  bringing  a  present.1  He  visited  a  harlot 
at  Gaza  (Judg.  16:1)  and  appears  to  have  suffered  no 
blame;  Jephthah’s  mother  was  a  woman  of  similar  record 
(Judg.  11  :i).  The  sons  of  Eli  are  condemned  for  their 
relations  with  the  women  attendants  of  the  shrine  of 
Shiloh  (I  Sam.  2:22),  though  the  precise  ground  of  the 
censure  is  not  clear.  Abner  is  chided  by  Ishbosheth, 
Saul’s  son,  for  his  relations  with  Rizpah,  Saul’s  concubine; 

1  See  W.  R.  Smith,  Kinship  and  Marriage  in  Early  Arabia  (2d  ed.), 
PP*  83-93* 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  17 


Ishbosheth’s  objection,  however,  is  based  not  upon  moral, 
but  upon  political,  grounds  (II  Sam.  3:7  f.) ;  compare 
similar  sentiments  in  the  case  of  Absalom  (II  Sam. 
16:21  f.),  and  of  Adonijah  (I  Kings  2 : 17-25).  A  Levite’s 
concubine  is  unfaithful  to  him  and  returns  to  her  father’s 
house,  whither  the  Levite  goes  to  bring  her  back  with  no 
indication  of  any  severe  condemnation  (Judg.  19:2,  3). 
David’s  sin  with  Bathsheba  is  condemned  indeed,  but  the 
ground  of  the  condemnation  is  the  wrong  done  to  her 
husband,  and  not  any  wrong  to  Bathsheba  or  himself 
(II  Sam.,  chap.  n).  Under  such  circumstances,  women 
as  such  seem  to  have  had  little  consideration.  Chivalry 
was  an  unknown  quantity.  One  of  the  most  glaring  illus¬ 
trations  of  this  is  the  action  of  the  old  father  in  Gibeah 
who  offered  to  turn  his  own  virgin  daughter  over  to  the 
lust  of  the  mob  in  order  to  save  his  guest,  the  Levite 
(Judg.  19:24).  That  same  horrible  story  of  outrage  fur¬ 
nishes  another  testimonial  to  the  inconsiderateness  of  the 
attitude  toward  women.  The  Levite’s  concubine,  after 
a  night  of  horror,  crawled  home  to  die  on  the  threshold 
of  her  husband’s  lodging.  When  he  opened  the  door 
in  the  morning,  there  she  lay — dead.  Under  the  cir¬ 
cumstances  a  touch  of  sympathy  at  least  might  have 
been  expected.  But  no!  Not  knowing  that  she  was 
dead,  the  husband  blurted  forth  a  curt  order,  “Up,  and 
let  us  be  going!”  The  only  ray  of  light  in  this  moral 
darkness  is  the  moral  revulsion  of  “  all  Israel”  when  news 
of  the  outrage  spread  abroad  (Judg.  19 : 26  ff.).  Another 
set  of  experiences  passed  through  by  Michal,  daughter  of 
Saul,  shows  that  women  were  mere  pawns  in  the  game 
of  life.  Michal  fell  in  love  with  David  (I  Sam.  18:20- 
29)  and,  for  ulterior  motives,  was  given  to  him  in  marriage 


i8 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


by  Saul.  When  Saul  turned  openly  against  David,  he 
gave  his  daughter  to  Phalti,  even  though  she  was  already 
David’s  wife  (I  Sam.  25:44).  Later  when  David  as 
king  of  Judah  is  approached  by  Abner  with  a  view  to 
giving  David  possession  of  the  throne  of  northern  Israel, 
David’s  first  demand  of  Abner  is  that  his  wife  Michal  be 
restored  to  him  (II  Sam.  3:13).  David’s  motive  here  is 
at  least  open  to  the  suspicion  of  having  been  that  of 
a  politician  rather  than  that  of  a  devoted  husband. 
Incidentally,  the  figure  of  Phalti,  the  bereft  husband, 
accompanying  his  wife  and  “  weeping  as  he  went,”  is 
touching  and  demonstrative  of  the  fact  that  true  affec¬ 
tion  was  not  wholly  unknown  to  husbands.  But  Michal 
had  yet  more  to  endure.  When  David  so  deported  him¬ 
self,  at  the  time  of  the  bringing  up  of  the  ark  to  Jerusalem, 
as  to  shock  Michal ’s  sense  of  decency,  which  we  need  not 
suppose  to  have  been  highly  developed,  she  ventured  to 
tell  David  what  she  thought  of  him.  In  return  for  this 
she  was  apparently  banished  from  David’s  presence  for 
the  rest  of  her  life  (II  Sam.  6 : 20-23) .  Certainly,  David’s 
allusion  to  her  father’s  failure  was  anything  but  tactful. 
The  story  of  Jephthah’s  daughter  reveals  between  the 
lines  a  true  parental  affection,  compelled,  however,  to 
give  place  to  the  fear  of  God.  In  like  manner,  the  record 
of  Hannah  bringing  up  little  garments  annually  to  her 
small  son  at  Shiloh  shows  a  mother’s  heart.  David,  too, 
reveals  his  love  for  his  children  unmistakably.  Indeed, 
it  overpowers  his  sense  of  justice  and  degenerates  into 
weak  partiality.  Pie  fails  to  punish  Amnon  for  his 
dastardly  crime,  and  his  grief  over  Absalom  outweighs  all 
his  sense  of  wrong.  The  outraged  king  is  lost  in  the 
heartbroken  father  (II  Sam.  18:29,  32  f.). 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  19 


12.  Bloodshed: — Turning  from  the  intimacy  of  family 
affairs,  we  take  up  lastly  the  ethical  relations  among 
members  of  the  general  Hebrew  public.  The  records 
of  internecine  wars  are  marred  by  deeds  of  savagery 
and  brutality.  Abimelech,  when  he  took  the  rebellious 
city  of  Shechem,  slew  all  the  population,  and  “  sowed  the 
city  with  salt,”  and  burned  alive  “  about  a  thousand  men 
and  women”  in  a  stronghold  (Judg.  9:45,  49,  52). 
Through  the  envy  and  greed  of  Ephraim  war  broke  out 
between  Ephraim  and  Gilead  in  which  forty-two  thou¬ 
sand  Ephraimites  were  slain — a  figure  slightly  overdrawn, 
to  be  sure,  but  reflecting  the  savagery  of  the  conflict 
(Judg.  12:1-6).  The  Israelitish  army  slew  all  the  men, 
women,  and  children  of  Jabesh  Gilead,  with  the  excep¬ 
tion  of  four  hundred  young  virgins  who  were  turned  over 
as  wives  to  the  surviving  Benjamites,  because  Jabesh 
Gilead  had  not  joined  in  the  common  war  against  Ben¬ 
jamin  (Judg.  21:10,  n).  The  bloody  tragedy  at  Gibeon 
(ii  Sam.  2:12-17)  was  apparently  due  to  treachery. 
Political  murder  was  practiced  without  scruple.  Saul 
slew  the  whole  priestly  group  at  Nob,  men,  women,  and 
children,  on  suspicion  of  their  being  friendly  to  his  enemy 
David  (I  Sam.  22 :  n-19).  The  whole  house  of  Jeroboam 
was  slain  by  Nadab  (I  Kings  15:29,  30) ;  Zimri  murdered 
Elah  and  all  the  house  of  Baasha  (I  Kings  16:9-12); 
and  of  the  end  of  Tibni  it  is  stated  as  a  matter  of  course, 
“so  Tibni  died  and  Omri  became  king”  (I  Kings  16:22). 
Blood-revenge  was  in  full  swing  and  accounted  for  many 
deaths.  The  prominent  cases  on  record  are  the  murder 
of  Abner  by  Joab  in  revenge  for  Abner’s  killing  Asahel  in 
war  (II  Sam.  3:22-27);  David’s  slaughter  of  the  mur¬ 
derers  of  Ishbaal  (II  Sam.  4 : 4-32) ;  and  Solomon’s  murder 


20 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


of  Joab  (I  Kings  2:5,  6,  28-34).  Other  cases  of  murder 
without  any  such  justification  are  David’s  killing  of 
Uriah  in  order  to  escape  the  detection  of  his  sin  with 
Uriah’s  wife  (II  Sam.,  chap,  n);  Joab’s  murder  of 
Amasa  without  provocation  other  than  jealousy  (II  Sam. 
20:9,  10);  Saul’s  attack  upon  the  Gibeonites  (II  Sam. 
21:1);  Solomon’s  slaying  of  Shimei  (I  Kings  2:36-46); 
and  the  stoning  of  Adoram  the  taskmaster  by  the  Israel¬ 
ites  (I  Kings  12:18).  David  was  saved  from  a  massacre 
of  Nabal  and  his  retinue  by  the  clever  intervention  of 
Abigail  (I  Sam.,  chap.  25) ;  and  Solomon  would  have  killed 
Jeroboam  could  he  have  caught  him  (I  Kings  11:40). 

13.  Suicide. — Brutality  in  the  treatment  of  criminals 
is  seen  in  David’s  treatment  of  the  murderers  of  Ishbaal. 
Not  satisfied  with  merely  slaying  them,  he  hung  up  their 
bodies  and  cut  off  their  hands  and  their  feet  (II  Sam. 
4:5-12).  With  such  low  standards  of  the  value  of  life 
and  the  dignity  of  personality  as  these,  it  is  quite  in 
keeping  that  suicide  should  be  taken  as  a  matter  of 
course.  The  known  cases  are  those  of  Saul  and  his 
armour-bearer  (I  Sam.  31:4),  Ahithophel  (II  Sam. 
17:23),  and  Zimri  (I  Kangs  16:18).  Saul  regarded 
suicide  as  more  honorable  than  death  at  the  hands  of 
the  Philistines.  These  men  were  all  offenders  in  one 
way  or  another  against  the  principles  and  programs 
approved  by  our  documents;  and  it  may  be,  therefore, 
that  suicide  is  regarded  as  self-confessed  failure  and 
self-condemnation  which  speaks  for  itself  and  need  not 
be  emphasized  by  the  recorder.  It  is  a  fitting  end  for 
transgressors. 

14.  Deceit  and  lies. — Lying  and  deceit  are  so  common 
in  the  oriental  world  even  at  the  present  time  as  to  be 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  21 


classified  as  near-virtues  rather  than  as  vices.  Similar 
usage  prevailed  in  the  period  covered  by  our  sources. 
David  deceived  Abimelech,  the  priest  of  Nob,  unmerci¬ 
fully.  He  assured  him  that  he  was  on  Saul’s  private 
business,  of  so  'urgent  a  character  that  he  had  had 
no  time  to  provide  himself  with  food  and  weapons,  and 
that  the  escort  which  might  have  been  expected  to 
accompany  a  son-in-law  of  the  king  was  sent  on  later 
to  meet  him  at  a  rendezvous;  all  of  which  was  pure 
fabrication  and  intended  to  mislead  (I  Sam.  21: iff.). 
David  also  deceived  Uriah  the  Hittite  and  betrayed  him 
to  his  death  (II  Sam.,  chap.  11).  “The  ruling  passion” 
being  “strong  in  death,”  he  passed  on  to  his  son  Solomon 
the  task  of  compassing  the  death  of  Joab,  his  loyal 
supporter  and  friend,  against  whom  he  had  not  dared 
to  lift  his  own  hand;  so  also  that  of  Shimei,  the  Benja- 
mite,  whom  at  a  crucial  moment  he  had  sworn  not  to 
kill  (I  Kings  2:5,  6,  8,  9).1  Jonathan  deceived  his 
father,  Saul,  because  of  his  own  love  for  David  (I  Sam. 

1  This  last  will  and  testament  of  David’s  in  its  present  form  is  quite 
generally  made  a  later  addition  to  the  record,  and  is  disposed  of  as  a 
libel  upon  David.  The  document  doubtless  has  undergone  some  revision. 
But  there  is  insufficient  reason  for  treating  it  as  wholly  due  to  later 
imagination.  We  have  three  narratives  of  the  life  of  David,  viz., 
(1)  I  Chron.,  chaps.  1-11,  (2)  the  Sm  material  in  Samuel,  (3)  the  SI 
material  in  Samuel.  A  comparison  of  these  lives,  one  with  another, 
shows  a  steadily  and  rapidly  developing  idealization  of  David  to  have 
taken  place.  It  is  hardly  likely  that  in  the  midst  of  such  a  develop¬ 
ment  there  should  have  originated  a  libel  of  this  sort  upon  the  ideal 
king.  Further,  the  David  of  the  oldest  records  suffers  little  from 
this  account.  He  is  already  credited  with  deeds  and  attitudes  which 
make  those  credited  to  him  here  pale  into  insignificance.  It  is  better 
to  let  David  carry  this  slight  additional  burden  than  to  load  it  upon 
the  back  of  some  later  writer  living  at  a  more  civilized  and  moralized 
period. 


22 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


20:1-10,  18-39;  23:17:8:.).  Jezebel  had  no  difficulty 
in  obtaining  false  witnesses  who  swore  away  Naboth’s  life 
(I  Kings,  chap.  21). 

15.  Drunkenness  and  immorality. — Two  other  vices 
remain  to  be  catalogued.  Drunkenness  seems  to  have 
..  been  a  common  failing.  How  common  it  was  may  be 
seen  from  the  story  of  Hannah  at  Shiloh  (I  Sam.  1:9-16). 
When  Eh  saw  her  engaged  in  silent  prayer  and  in  great 
stress  of  soul,  he  at  once  leaped  to  the  conclusion  that 
she  was  drunk.  And  that,  too,  notwithstanding  that 
she  was  a  woman  and  in  the  house  of  Yahweh.  It  is 
quite  clear  that  drunkenness  was  a  common  spectacle 
at  Shiloh;  otherwise  such  an  interpretation  would  never 
have  been  placed  upon  a  good  woman’s  devotions. 
Incidentally,  both  Eli  and  Hannah  agree  that  it  is  a 
reprehensible  practice.  ^Religious  feasts  seem  to  have 
been  occasions  of  heavy  drinking.  Absalom  takes  it  for 
granted  that  at  his  feast  of  sheep-shearing  Amnon  will 
in  due  course  be  overcome  with  drink  (II  Sam.  13 : 28) 
and  plans  his  murder  accordingly.  Another  feast  of 
sheep-shearing  is  better  known,  viz.,  that  of  Nabal  the 
Calebite,  who  pastured  his  flocks  in  Carmel  (I  Sam., 
chap.  25).  David,  the  head  of  a  band  of  outlaws,  sent 
emissaries  to  Nabal  asking  for  gifts  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  David’s  band  had  not  molested  Nabal’s  property 
during  the  previous  year.  Nabal  surlily  refused  the 
request.  Thereupon  David  prepared  to  avenge  the 
insult,  but  was  met  on  his  way  to  Nabal’s  farm  by  Abigail, 
the  beautiful  and  winning  wife  of  Nabal.  She  and  her 
liberal  gifts  appeased  the  wrath  of  the  passionate  out¬ 
law,  and  Nabal  escaped  impending  destruction.  But 
all  the  time  that  this  protection  of  his  life  and  goods 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  23 


was  being  planned  and  carried  out,  Nabal  was  drinking 
himself  dead  drunk  (I  Sam.  25:36  f.).  About  ten  days 
thereafter  Nabal  died,  perhaps  as  a  result  of  the  dissipa¬ 
tion.  When  word  thereof  was  brought  to  David,  he 
said,  “Blessed  be  Yahweh,”  and  straightway  married 
the  widow.  In  another  case  involving  a  woman,  David 
plied  her  husband  with  drink  without  accomplishing  his 
purpose  (II  Sam.  11:13).  Elah,  king  of  Israel,  “was 
drinking  himself  drunk”  when  he  was  murdered  by 
Zimri  (I  Kings  16:9).  The  second  vice  is  one  that  has 
no  precise  equivalent  in  modern  civilized  society. 
Prostitution  was  practiced  by  both  male  and  female 
hierodules  under  the  protection  of,  and  as  a  part  of,  reli¬ 
gion  and  in  the  precincts  of  the  shrines  themselves.  This 
was  probably  the  function  of  the  women  concerned  in 
the  sin  of  the  sons  of  Eli  (I  Sam.  2:22);  and  it  is  recorded 
that  there  were  male  prostitutes  of  this  sort  throughout 
Judah  in  Rehoboam’s  day  (I  Kings  14 : 24)  and  that  they 
were  finally  abolished  by  King  Asa  (I  Kings  15:12). 
This  corruption  of  the  moral  and  religious  life  of  Israel 
was  probably  acquired  from  the  sensuous  worship  of  the 
Canaanites,  whose  gods  and  sanctuaries  were  readily 
adopted  by  the  incoming  Hebrews. 

16.  Courage  and  generosity. — The  virtues  that  shine 
against  this  dark  background,  like  stars  on  a  moonless 
night,  are  not  numerous.  This  is  probably  due  in  part 
to  the  fact  that  goodness  is  not  “news.”  It  may  be 
taken  for  granted  and,  unless  extraordinary  at  some 
point,  is  not  likely  to  arouse  interest  or  to  impress  itself 
deeply  upon  the  memories  of  men.  The  ancient  Hebrew 
world  probably  resembled  our  own  age  in  this  respect. 
We  may  therefore  give  them  credit  for  a  substantial  body 


24  THEJmORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

of  “good”  people,  who  never  did  anything  to  make 
themselves  notorious.  They  were  measurably  honest,' 
paid  their  debts,  were  reasonably  truthful,  lovers  of  peace 
and  order,  and  treated  their  neighbor’s  person  and 
property  with  due  respect.  A  criminal  society  cannot 
permanently  exist.  A  few  of  the  substantial  virtues  of 
early  Israel  come  to  the  surface  in  our  sources.  Among 
a  people  engaged  in  war  for  generations,  it  goes  without 
saying  that  courage  and  bravery  would  develop  to  a 
high  pitch.  Stories  of  personal  daring  would  be  treasured 
and  passed  on  from  generation  to  generation.  We  hear 
records  of  this  sort  in  the  case  of  Gideon’s  exploit  (Judg. 
7:19  fL),  of  Jonathan  and  his  armour-bearer  routing  the 
Philistines  (I  Sam.  14:6  fL),  of  Samson  with  his  insuper¬ 
able  strength  and  reckless  courage  (Judg.,  chaps.  14-16), 
of  David  slaying  the  lion  and  the  bear  and  the  Philistine 
giant  (I  Sam.  17:32  fL)  and  venturing  with  one  com¬ 
panion  into  the  midst  of  Saul’s  camp  (I  Sam.  26:6  fL), 
and  of  the  wondrous  deeds  of  David’s  heroes  (II  Sam. 
23:8  fL).  With  this  quality  of  courage  there  sometimes 
went  an  admirable  magnanimity.  Saul’s  response  to 
the  appeal  of  Jabesh  Gilead  for  help  against  the  Ammo¬ 
nites  was  noble  and  generous  (I  Sam.,  chap.  n).  Jona¬ 
than’s  unselfishness  in  supporting  David  to  his  own 
personal  disadvantage  is  beyond  question.  David’s 
elegy  over  Saul  and  Jonathan  is  a  beautiful  bit  of  memo¬ 
rial  poetry  and  shows  a  large-mindedness  that  can  forgive 
the  past.  Abner  shrinks  from  killing  an  unarmoured 
man  and  urges  Asahel  to  provide  himself  with  mail 
(II  Sam.  2:18-23),  but  in  vain.  Joab  generously  fore¬ 
goes  the  glory  of  taking  Rabbah  from  the  Ammonites, 
and  waits  for  David  to  appear  and  take  it  in  person 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  25 


(II  Sam.  12 : 26  ff.).  David  himself,  when  his  warriors  at 
Bethlehem  risked  their  lives  to  get  him  a  drink  of  water, 
refused  the  drink  procured  at  so  great  a  price  and  sancti¬ 
fied  their  deed  by  pouring  out  the  water  as  a  drink 
offering  to  Yahweh  (II  Sam.  23:15  ft'.). 

17.  Hospitality. — The  courteous  and  generous  hospi¬ 
tality  of  the  old  man  at  Gibeah  to  the  wandering  Levite 
and  his  concubine  is  introduced  incidentally  and  as  a 
matter  of  course,  showing  that  there  was  nothing  excep¬ 
tional  in  it  to  the  mind  of  the  writer  (Judg.  19:16  ft.). 
Saul’s  modesty  in  concealing  the  fact  that  Samuel  had 
anointed  him  as  king  is  characteristic  of  a  strong  and 
brave  man  (I  Sam.  10:16;  cf.  11:12  f.,  a  later  edito¬ 
rial  note).  When  Saul  was  slain  the  men  of  Jabesh 
Gilead  did  not  forget  his  help  in  their  time  of  need  but 
expressed  their  gratitude  by  making  an  all-night  march 
to  remove  the  bodies  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  from  the 
walls  of  Beth-shan  upon  which  they  were  fastened,  and 
give  them  decent  burial  (I  Sam.  31:11  f.).  In  contrast 
with  this,  the  men  of  Keilah  whom  David  had  delivered 
from  the  Philistines  could  not  be  trusted  to  refuse  to 
betray  him  into  the  hands  of  Saul  (I  Sam.  23:5,  12). 
David  thanked  the  men  of  Jabesh  Gilead  for  their  kind¬ 
ness  to  Saul  and  Jonathan,  and  promised  to  reward  them 
(II  Sam.  2 : 5-7).  David  himself  met  with  kindness  from 
many  hands  at  the  time  of  Absalom’s  rebellion  and  death. 
His  hungry  and  thirsty  troops  were  nourished  by  his 
friends  (II  Sam.  17:27-29),  and  David  repaid  this  kind¬ 
ness  as  he  had  opportunity  (I  Kings  2:7).  Ahimaaz, 
the  runner,  ran  his  best  to  get  to  David  before  the 
Cushite  runner  and  to  give  him  good  news  before 
the  shock  of  Absalom’s  death  should  overwhelm  him 


26 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


(II  Sam.  18 : 19  ff.).  The  people  as  a  whole  sympathized 
deeply  with  David  in  his  grief  (II  Sam.  19:1  ff.). 

18.  Friendship. — Personal  affection  between  one  man 
and  another,  deepening  into  genuine  love,  is  evident  in 
the  case  of  David  and  Jonathan.  Even  Saul  loved 
David  greatly  upon  first  acquaintance  (I  Sam.  16:21). 
But  David  and  Jonathan,  according  to  an  editorial  note 
(I  Sam.  18:1  ff.),  loved  one  another  at  first  sight  so  that 
“soul  was  knit  with  soul.”  This  affection  was  severely 
tested  on  both  sides,  but  held  firm  to  the  last.  David’s 
elegy  exhibits  a  touch  of  genius  in  the  expression  of 
David’s  feelings: 

Jonathan,  when  thou  didst  die  I  was  undone; 

I  was  afflicted  for  thee,  my  brother  Jonathan. 

Thou  wast  very  dear  to  me; 

Wonderful  was  thy  love  for  me — 

Passing  the  love  of  women  [II  Sam.  1:25  f.]. 

This  love  of  David’s  was  abiding;  it  expressed  itself 
after  Jonathan’s  death  in  deeds  of  kindness  to  his 
children  (II  Sam.  4:9  ff.;  9:1-13). 

19.  Justice—  The  sense  of  justice  and  right  was 
strong,  even  if  not  highly  developed.  The  whole  institu¬ 
tion  of  blood-revenge  is  an  expression  of  it.  The  prin¬ 
ciple  of  “tit  for  tat”  is  clearly  expressed  in  the  account 
of  Samuel’s  slaying  of  Agag  (I  Sam.  15:32  f.).  Eli’s 
sons,  though  priests,  are  charged  with  robbing  the  public 
as  it  came  to  sacrifice  at  Shiloh  (I  Sam.  2:12  ff.),  and 
similar  charges  are  preferred  against  the  sons  of  Samuel 
in  the  exercise  of  their  judicial  capacity,  in  a  later  edi¬ 
torial  note  (I  Sam.  8: iff.).  Samuel  himself,  in  a  late 
Deuteronomic  passage  (I  Sam.  12:3,  4),  is  made  to  give 
himself  a  clean  bill  of  moral  health  in  terms  which  are 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  27 


perhaps  ahead  of  Samuel’s  times.  But  that  Samuel  was 
a  man  of  high  moral  standing  as  judged  by  the  standards 
of  his  own  age,  there  can  be  little  doubt.  The  Deuter- 
onomic  tradition  is  probably  well  grounded.  David 
refused  to  lay  hands  upon  Saul  on  the  ground  that  that 
was  Yahweh’s  prerogative  only,  and  that  the  just  God 
would  in  his  own  way  and  time  smite  Saul  for  his  sins 
(I  Sam.  26:9-11).  David  is  credited  by  an  early  editor 
(II  Sam.  8:15)  with  having  executed  justice  and  judg¬ 
ment  for  all  his  people,  though  Absalom  wins  away  the 
hearts  of  the  people  from  David  by  administering  justice 
more  promptly  than  David  and  by  doing  so  in  person 
(II  Sam.  15 : 1-6).  The  parable  of  the  ewe  lamb  put  into 
the  mouth  of  Nathan  is  commonly  thought  to  be  some¬ 
what  later  than  David’s  time,  but  its  essential  principle 
that  the  rich  must  not  add  to  their  riches  by  robbing  the 
poor  is  quite  within  the  range  of  our  period  (II  Sam., 
chap.  12).  David’s  division  of  Mephibosheth’s  estate  by 
giving  half  of  it  to  his  servant  Ziba  (II  Sam.  19:29) 
shows  a  somewhat  high-handed  and  arbitrary  method, 
not  wholly  in  accordance  with  justice  as  evinced  by  the 
existing  record.  Solomon’s  shrewdness  in  discovering  the 
real  facts  of  a  case  is  illustrated  by  the  story  of  the  two 
women  contending  for  a  child  (I  Kings  3:16  fT.) .  The 
story  of  Ahab’s  seizure  of  Naboth’s  vineyard  represents 
the  protest  of  the  Hebrew  conscience  against  the 
encroachments  of  a  despotic  king  upon  the  rights  of  a 
Hebrew  freeholder,  and  leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  con¬ 
demnation  heaped  upon  the  act  of  the  king  and  queen 
(I  Kings,  chap.  21).  This  was  at  the  very  close  of  our 
pre-prophetic  period  and  shows  that  the  age  was  sound 
at  heart  and  recognized  the  right  of  a  man  to  hold  on  to 


28 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


his  little  patrimony  even  when  by  so  doing  he  frustrated 
plans  for  the  promotion  of  the  royal  pleasure. 

20.  Ethical  authority. — The  administration  of  justice 
and  the  authority  for  its  enforcement  in  later  times  lay 
in  the  hands  of  the  king;  David  already  exercised  it. 
But  in  the  earlier  part  of  our  period  the  public  conscience 
and  generally  accepted  custom  established  authoritative 
standards.  The  rigid  rules  of  later  times  were  largely 
lacking  and  the  men  of  those  later  days  looked  back 
upon  these  times  as  a  period  of  chaos;  e.g.,  “in  those 
days  there  was  no  king  in  Israel;  every  man  did  what 
was  right  in  his  own  eyes”  (Judg.  17:6;  21:5).  The 
force  of  public  opinion  in  shaping  customary  morality 
is  suggested  by  Tamar’s  protest  to  her  half-brother 
Amnon,  “no  such  thing  ought  to  be  done  in  Israel” 
(II  Sam.  13:12);  and  more  emphatically  by  the  form  of 
the  statement  of  the  woman  of  Abel  as  it  runs  in  the 
Septuagint:  “In  early  times  they  said,  Counsel  is  surely 
asked  at  Abel  and  at  Dan  as  to  whether  the  things 
ceased  which  the  faithful  of  Israel  established;  they 
shall  surely  ask  of  a  matter  in  Abel  and  so  forth,  whether 
they  ceased’”  (II  Sam.  20:18).  A  strong  personality 
by  his  decision  in  a  given  crisis  may  establish  a  precedent 
for  succeeding  generations  and  this  may  in  course  of 
time  crystallize  into  statutory  law.  One  such  case  is 
on  record  in  our  period  (I  Sam.  30:24  f.).  When  David 
returned  from  his  victory  over  the  Amalekites,  a  dispute 
arose  as  to  the  distribution  of  the  booty.  Those  who 

V. 

had  participated  in  the  fight  grudged  any  share  of  the 
spoil  to  those  who  had  stayed  behind  to  guard  the  women 
and  children  and  the  impedimenta.  David,  however, 
with  a  keener  sense  of  justice,  decided  in  favor  of  those 


THE  EARLIEST  HISTORICAL  NARRATIVES  29 


who  were  left  behind,  saying,  “as  is  his  share  that  goes 
down  to  the  battle,  so  shall  his  share  be  that  tarries  by 
the  stuff;  they  shall  share  alike.”  This  rule  of  David’s 
became  an  established  custom  in  Israel,  i.e.,  a  law,  from 
that  time  on.  Not  only  so,  but  in  course  of  time  this 
particular  law,  like  all  law,  was  given  divine  sanction,  in 
that  it  was  attributed  to  Moses,  who  received  it  directly 
from  the  lips  of  Yahweh  in  the  plains  of  Moab  (Num. 
31:25-47;  cf.  Josh.  22:8). 

21.  The  significance  of  this  period. — In  reflecting 
upon  the  materials  surveyed  in  this  chapter,  it  may  at 
first  thought  seem  as  if  we  had  been  reading  a  copy 
of  the  crime  sheet  at  the  police  headquarters  of  some 
large  city.  But  we  must  bear  in  mind  not  only  the 
fact  already  noted,  viz.,  that  goodness  does  not  often 
get  into  the  limelight,  but  also  the  further  fact  that  our 
body  of  literature,  small  though  it  is,  covers  a  history 
of  approximately  four  hundred  years.  When  this 
catalogue  of  evils  is  spread  out  over  a  period  of  that 
length,  the  impression  it  makes  is  much  less  vivid.  Not 
only  so,  but  to  do  justice  to  the  ethical  standards  of 
those  times,  and  particularly  of  the  days  in  which  our 
literary  sources  took  form,  we  must  remember  to  make 
allowance  for  the  transactions  and  attitudes  that  clearly 
come  under  the  condemnation  even  of  our  oldest  sources 
of  information.  The  encouraging  fact  is  that  there  was 
a  moral  consciousness  in  early  Israel.  Its  content 
differed  from  that  of  later  times,  but  it  was  no  less  vigor¬ 
ous  in  its  reaction  against  what  it  condemned — indeed, 
on  the  whole  it  was  more  so— and  it  was  susceptible  of 
education.  It  had  not  yet  attained,  but  it  was  pressing 
forward  to  higher  levels. 


CHAPTER  II 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 

22 a.  The  sources  of  the  materials  gathered  in  this  chap¬ 
ter  are  the  J  and  E  documents  of  the  Plexateuch.1  These 
documents  have  preserved  the  traditions  of  Israel  that 
were  current  from  earliest  times.  In  their  present  liter¬ 
ary  form  they  come  from  a  relatively  late  period  in  pre- 
prophetic  Israel  and  consequently  have  doubtless  suffered 
much  re-writing  at  the  hands  of  editors;  but  much  of 
their  contents  certainly  originated  in  very  early  times 
and  was  passed  on  from  generation  to  generation  in 
succession,  losing  something  of  historical  value  in  the 
process,  but  gaining  much  worth  for  the  moral  uplift 
of  the  generations.  These  were  the  stories  told  by  the 
elders  around  the  fireside  and  eagerly  absorbed  by  the 
listening  youth.  Their  educative  value,  therefore,  for 
early  Israel  can  hardly  be  exaggerated.  Here  we  shall 
find  the  moral  ideals  and  practices  that  did  much  to 
shape  the  thoughts  and  purposes  of  pre-prophetic  Israel. 
These  documents  belong  to  the  same  general  period  as 
the  histories  we  have  considered  in  chapter  i;  we  may 
not  expect,  therefore,  anything  essentially  different  here 
from  what  we  have  recorded  there.  The  morals  of  an 
age  are  in  general  unified,  and  what  we  find  in  any  one 
extensive  expression  of  its  life  will  be  apt  to  reappear  in 

1  For  an  explanation  of  these  symbols  and  a  discussion  of  their 
origin  and  character,  see  Carpenter  and  Harford-Battersby,  The  Hexa- 
teuch  (1900);  E.  S.  Brightman,  The  Sources  of  the  Hexateuch  (1918); 
A.  T.  Chapman,  An  Introduction  to  the  Pentateuch  (Cambridge  Bible, 
1911);  and  F.  C.  Eiselen,  The  Books  of  the  Pentateuch  (1916). 


30 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


31 


principle,  if  not  also  in  precept  and  practice,  in  every 
corresponding  section.  Let  us  remind  ourselves  also  that 
we  are  not  looking  here  for  information  as  to  the  char¬ 
acters  and  achievements  of  Noah,  Abraham,  Isaac, 
Jacob,  Moses,  and  their  brethren,  but  rather  for  light 
upon  the  moral  conceptions  and  practices  of  the  latter 
part  of  the  pre-prophetic  period  as  reflected  in  these 
traditions  about  the  men  of  days  gone  by. 

It  will  appear  in  reading  this  chapter  that  the  amount 
of  material  representing  standards  that  are  today  out¬ 
grown  is  considerably  greater  than  that  representing  the 
more  admirable  qualities.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  to 
remind  ourselves  again  that  goodness  has  little  value  as 
“news.”  Only  the  abnormal,  unusual,  striking  phenom¬ 
ena  of  life  are  apt  to  get  into  the  stream  of  tradition.  In 
all  probability  the  prophets  who  edited  these  documents 
took  them  as  they  had  been  handed  down,  did  not  select 
or  eliminate  to  any  great  extent,  and  sought  to  use  what 
had  come  to  their  hands  in  the  most  effective  way  for 
the  achievement  of  the  moral  and  spiritual  ends  they 
themselves  sought  to  serve. 

22 b.  The  morals  of  Yahweh. — We  may  begin  again 
with  a  study  of  the  moral  aspects  of  the  conception  of 
God.  The  morals  of  the  masses,  at  least,  will  not  be  any 
more  exalted  than  the  ethical  attitudes  and  motives  that 
they  assign  to  Yahweh.  We  shall  note  first  three  of  J’s 
stories,  which  reflect  a  very  primitive  idea  of  Yahweh. 
In  Exodus  24:9-11,  we  read,  “Then  went  up  Moses, 
Aaron,  Nadab  and  Abihu  and  seventy  of  the  elders  of 

Israel,  and  they  saw  the  God  of  Israel . And  upon 

the  elders  of  Israel  he  laid  not  his  hand ;  and  they  beheld 
God,  and  did  eat  and  drink.”  Again  in  Exodus  33 : 18-23, 


32 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


we  find,  “And  he  [i.e.,  Moses]  said,  ‘Show  me  I  pray 

thee,  thy  glory . ’  And  he  said,  ‘Thou  canst  not 

see  my  face,  for  man  shall  not  see  me  and  live/  And 
Yahweh  said,  ‘Behold  there  is  a  place  by  me,  and  thou 
shalt  stand  upon  the  rock.  And  it  shall  be  that  while 
my  glory  passes  by  I  will  put  thee  in  a  cleft  of  the  rock 
and  will  cover  thee  with  my  hand  until  I  have  passed 
by.  And  I  will  take  away  my  hand  and  thou  shalt 
see  my  back;  but  my  face  shall  not  be  seen/  ”  To  these 
two  extraordinary  stories  we  add  a  third  from  Exodus 
4: 24  ff.  that  is  even  more  extraordinary.  “And  it  came 
to  pass  on  the  way  at  the  lodging  place  that  Yahweh  met 
him  and  sought  to  kill  him  [i.e.,  Moses].  Then  Zipporah 
took  a  flint  and  cut  off  the  foreskin  of  her  son,  and  cast 
it  at  his  feet;  and  she  said,  ‘Surely  a  bridegroom  of  blood 
art  thou  to  me/  So  He  let  him  alone/’  With  such 
conceptions  of  God  as  these — crass,  materialistic,  primi¬ 
tive,  non-spiritual,  and  non-ethical — we  may  not  expect 
to  find  a  highly  developed  morality  expressing  itself  in 
the  thought  of  God  or  anywhere  else, 

a)  In  his  dealings  with  non-Israelites  Yahweh  seems 
to  be  under  very  light  moral  obligations.  Pharaoh  is 
given  no  chance  to  escape  destruction  for  himself  and 
his  people  because  Yahweh  hardens  his  heart  that  he 
may  not  repent  (Exod.  9:35;  10:20,  27  f. — all  E).  The 
Pharaoh  who  in  all  good  faith  took  Sarah  unto  himself 
for  wife  was  smitten  with  all  his  household  in  some 
mysterious  way,  because  he  had  unwittingly  taken 
Abraham’s  wife  (Gen.  12: 10-20  =  J).  In  this  case 
both  Abraham  and  Sarah  had  been  guilty  of  concealing 
the  truth,  but  it  was  the  innocent  Pharaoh  that  must 
suffer.  E’s  parallel  story,  in  which  the  Philistine, 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


33 


Abimelech,  takes  the  place  of  the  Egyptian  Pharaoh, 
makes  one  significant  additional  statement,  viz.,  that 
Abimelech  was  kept  from  sin  by  Yahweh,  but  the  out¬ 
come  is  the  same  (Gen.  2o:i-i8  =  E).  This  addition 
was  made  not  for  the  sake  of  the  heathen  king’s  reputa¬ 
tion,  but  rather  to  save  that  of  Sarah.  It  showrs  a  slight 
advance  of  moral  standards  in  E  as  compared  with  J. 
Yahweh  ruthlessly  sends  down  fire  and  brimstone  upon 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah  and  wipes  the  cities  and  their 
populations  off  the  face  of  the  earth,  because  of  their 
awful  wickedness  (Gen.  19:24,  J).  Fearful  destruction 
was  wrought  upon  the  Egyptians  at  the  behest  of  the 
angry  Moses  (Exod.  11:4-10,  J).  The  midwives  con¬ 
nived  with  the  Hebrew  mothers  and  saved  the  new-born 
sons  alive,  contrary  to  the  Pharaoh’s  express  orders,  tell¬ 
ing  him  unvarnished  lies  in  explanation,  and  were  blessed 
of  Yahweh  for  so  doing  (Exod.  1:20  f.,  E).  The  escap¬ 
ing  Hebrews  were  commanded  by  Yahweh  to  despoil 
the  Egyptians  (Exod.  3:22;  11:2,  3;  12:35!.  =  E).  A 
perpetual  feud  between  Israel  and  Amalek  was  in  accord 
with  Yahweh’s  will  (Exod.  17:16,  E).  The  principle  at 
the  bottom  of  all  this  sort  of  thing  is  that  Yahweh  is 
conceived  of  as  Israel’s  God  and  that  he  is  counted  upon 
to  defend  the  interests  of  his  own  people  and  to  damage 
those  of  all  other  peoples  wherever  the  needs  of  Israel 
demand  it.  The  prosperity  of  non-Hebraic  peoples  is 
dependent  wholly  upon  their  attitude  to  the  Hebrews, 
Yahweh’s  own  special  favorites.  “I  will  bless  them  that 
bless  thee  and  him  that  curses  thee  I  will  curse”  (Gen. 

12:3,  J). 

b)  The  conception  of  Yahweh  was  not  in  this  period, 
if  ever,  completely  ethicized.  Some  phases  of  it  lay 


34 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


altogether  outside  of  the  sphere  of  ethics.  For  example, 
in  Exodus  19:21  f.,  J,  when  Moses  ascended  Mt.  Sinai, 
“Yahweh  said  to  Moses,  ‘Go  down,  charge  the  people, 
lest  they  break  through  unto  Yahweh  to  gaze,  and  many 
of  them  perish.  And  let  the  priests  also,  that  come  near 
to  Yahweh,  sanctify  themselves,  lest  Yahweh  break 
forth  upon  them.’”  Yahweh  is  here  thought  of  as  a 
consuming  fire  that  destroys  everyone  whom  it  touches. 
The  only  safe  way  is  to  keep  out  of  range  of  its  deadly 
power  or  to  render  one’s  self  immune  to  the  danger  by 
ritualistic  measures.  He  is  a  menace  to  friend  and  foe 
alike.  Character  is  no  defense  against  his  consuming 
wrath;  only  the  performance  of  certain  almost  magical 
ceremonies  is  of  avail. 

We  move  back  into  the  region  of  ethics  again  when  we 
take  up  the  story  of  the  Fall  as  found  in  J  and  scrutinize 
it  for  its  views  of  Yahweh.  The  origin  of  sin  is  there 
traced  back  finally  to  the  malevolence  of  the  Serpent. 
He  makes  appeal  to  the  woman  as  “the  weaker  vessel” 
and  induces  her  to  break  the  command  of  Yahweh  by 
eating  of  the  fruit  of  the  forbidden  tree.  No  reason 
is  given  for  this  prohibition;  it  is  an  arbitrary  decision 
on  the  part  of  Yahweh.  With  a  slight  modification  of 
the  original  lines,  we  may  say: 

Theirs  not  to  reason  why, 

Theirs  but  to  do  or  die. 

The  result  of  this  disobedience  is  amazing.  First  of  all, 
the  man  and  the  woman  suddenly  awake  to  a  conscious¬ 
ness  of  the  fact  that  they  are  naked.  In  other  words, 
presumably  this  is  a  discovery  of  sex  consciousness. 
Second,  they  learn  that  they  have  brought  upon  them- 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


35 


selves  endless  troubles,  the  whole  serpent  brood  shall  lie 
in  wait  for  them  henceforth  forever;  the  process  of 
child-bearing  shall  be  fraught  with  agony  for  successive 
generations  of  women;  woman  shall  be  forever  subordi¬ 
nate  to  the  will  of  man;  the  earth  shall  respond  but 
grudgingly  to  the  hard  labor  of  man  so  that  his  life  shall 
be  spent  in  ceaseless  toil;  and  finally  he  shall  return  in 
death  unto  the  dust  whence  he  came.  Third,  Yahweh 
realizes  that  mankind  is  now  endowed  with  godlike 
knowledge  in  that  he  can  distinguish  between  the  bene¬ 
ficial  and  the  injurious  and,  fearing  lest  man  may  “put 
forth  his  hand  and  take  also  of  the  tree  of  life  and  eat  and 
live  forever,”1  he  drives  him  out  of  the  Garden  of  Eden 
into  the  cold  and  hostile  world.  That  is,  Yahweh  is 
jealous  of  his  own  supreme  power  and  does  not  propose 
to  leave  the  way  open  for  mankind  to  become  immortal 
and  so  to  enter  into  rivalry  with  himself.  The  Tower  of 
Babel  story  (Gen.  11:1-9,  J)  reflects  the  same  solicitude 
upon  Yahweh ’s  part  that  man  should  be  kept  in  his 
proper  sphere  and  not  be  allowed  to  indulge  his  aspira¬ 
tions  for  equality  with  God  too  freely. 

c)  The  anger  of  Yahweh  flamed  forth  with  destruc¬ 
tive  effect  upon  sinners,  even  when  they  were  members 
of  his  own  chosen  nation.  When  the  Hebrews  were 
seduced  by  the  women  of  Moab  and  participated  in  the 
worship  of  Baal  of  Peor,  Yahweh  ordered,  “Take  all  the 
chiefs  of  the  people  and  hang  them  up  unto  Yahweh 
before  the  sun,  that  the  heat  of  the  anger  of  Yahweh  may 
turn  away  from  Israel”  (Num.  25:4,  J).  Moses  also 
ordered  the  death  of  every  man  who  had  “joined  him- 

1  This  passage  is  perhaps  to  be  assigned  to  a  later  editor  of  this  story; 
but  in  any  case  it  is  a  primitive  aspect  of  the  God-idea. 


36 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


self  unto  the  Baal  of  Peor.”  These  drastic  measures 
were  necessary  in  order  to  stay  the  plague  which  had 
already  carried  off  twenty-four  thousand  of  the  people. 
In  like  manner  when  Yahweh  had  pronounced  a  ban  upon 
the  spoil  of  Jericho  and  Achan  had  violated  it  by  taking 
“a  goodly  Babylonish  mantle  and  two  hundred  shekels 
of  silver  and  a  wedge  of  gold  of  fifty  shekels  in  weight” 
for  his  own  use,  Yahweh  sent  defeat  upon  the  Israelites 
in  their  attack  upon  Ai,  so  that  thirty-six  men  fell  before 
the  foe,  and  Yahweh’s  favor  was  not  restored  until 
Achan  and  his  entire  family  were  stoned  to  death  and 
the  stolen  goods  were  burned.  Here  there  is  no  nice 
measuring  of  the  guilt  and  apportionment  of  it  where  it 
belongs,  but  all  Israel  must  suffer  that  the  guilt  may 
be  brought  to  light,  and  the  transgressor’s  family  perishes 
with  him  (Josh.  7 : 1-26).  The  methods  of  Yahweh  were 
rough;  but  they  were  terribly  effective. 

d)  Turning  from  these  savage  and  almost  brutal 
aspects  of  the  idea  of  God,  we  take  up  the  more 
human  phases  of  that  conception.  Yahweh’s  blessing  is 
bestowed  upon  his  loyal  servants  in  the  bestowal  of 
great  prosperity.  This  blessing  is  not  necessarily  condi¬ 
tioned  by  moral  considerations.  “  Yahweh  was  with 
Joseph  and  he  was  a  prosperous  man”  (Gen.  39:2,  3, 
21-23  =  J).  But  he  was  also  with  the  tricky  Jacob  and 
came  to  him  in  a  vision  at  Bethel  with  promises  of  count¬ 
less  progeny  and  world-wide  influence  (Gen.  28:11-15, 
J).  In  grateful  appreciation  of  his  favor,  Jacob  enters 
into  a  contract  with  God  by  the  terms  of  which  God  is 
to  receive  Jacob’s  service  and  a  tithe  of  all  his  increase 
in  return  for  food,  raiment,  and  protection  to  Jacob 
(Gen.  28:20-22,  E).  Jacob  is  a  born  trader;  he  even 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


37 


bargains  with  God.  In  quite  human  fashion,  Yahweh 
is  thought  of  as  solicitous  for  his  own  reputation  among 
men,  and  that  reputation  depends  upon  his  giving 
victory  to  his  people.  After  the  defeat  at  Ai,  Joshua 
addresses  Yahweh  thus:  “Oh,  Yahweh,  what  shall  I 
say,  now  that  Israel  has  turned  its  back  before  its 
enemies  ?  For  when  the  Canaanites  and  all  the  inhabit¬ 
ants  of  the  land  hear  of  it,  they  will  surround  us  and 
cut  off  our  name  from  the  land;  and  what  wilt  thou  do 
for  thy  great  name?”  (Josh.  7:9  f.,  J).  And  yet  at 
other  times  the  God-idea  can  be  used  to  put  to  shame 
the  human  failings.  This  is  the  case  in  two  E  passages. 
In  Numbers  23:19,  Balaam  impresses  upon  Balak  the 
dependability  of  God  by  saying: 

God  is  not  a  man  that  he  should  lie; 

Nor  a  son  of  man  that  he  should  change  his  mind; 

When  he  has  said,  will  he  not  do  it  ? 

And  when  he  has  spoken,  will  he  not  bring  it  to  pass  ? 

In  a  different  way,  the  same  sort  of  correction  of  human 
standards  is  furnished  by  the  story  of  Abraham’s  under¬ 
taking  to  sacrifice  Isaac  in  Genesis  22:1-13.  The  story 
as  written  is  a  tactful  protest  against  the  practice  of 
human  sacrifice.  That  the  practice  was  not  unusual 
is  fairly  evident  from  the  story  itself.  Abraham  is 
represented  as  having  received  command  from  God  to 
sacrifice  his  only  child.  It  does  not  surprise  him; 
he  makes  no  protest,  but  proceeds  to  carry  out  the 
order.  If  the  teller  of  this  story  had  thought  of  the 
transaction  as  extraordinary  or  unique,  he  surely  would 
have  represented  Abraham  as  objecting  or  questioning 
in  some  way;  but  instead  Abraham  takes  it  as  a  matter 
of  course.  If  the  event  really  happened  in  any  such  way 


38 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


as  is  described,  then  it  may  be  said  that  no  sane  man 
would  ever  conceive  it  to  be  his  God-given  duty  to 
slaughter  his  only  child  in  sacrifice,  unless  such  doings 
were  customary  in  his  day.  In  any  case,  the  angel  of 
Yahweh  is  introduced  to  stop  the  impending  tragedy 
and  put  the  seal  of  divine  approval  upon  Abraham’s 
loyalty;  and  a  sacrificial  ram  is  provided  in  Isaac’s 
place.  God  prefers  rams  to  first-born  sons.  This  is 
another  instance  in  which  E  takes  the  way  of  ethical 
progress. 

In  Genesis  15:6,  “  Abraham  believed  Yahweh  and  he 
considered  it  for  him  as  righteousness,”  which  is  variously 
assigned  to  J,  E,  and  a  later  editor,1  the  word  “righteous¬ 
ness”  does  not  have  its  ordinary  moral  connotation.  To 
whatever  period  it  may  belong,  the  thought  is  that  Abra¬ 
ham’s  implicit  confidence  in  the  fulfilment  of  the  divine 
promise,  notwithstanding  its  extraordinary  character,  is 
accepted  by  Yahweh  as  fulfilling  the  conditions  of  real 
piety  and  satisfying  all  requirements,  legalistic,  ritual¬ 
istic,  or  otherwise. 

23.  The  attitude  toward  foreigners. — Leaving  the 
ethical  aspects  of  the  God-idea,  we  now  turn  to  the 
consideration  of  human  relationships;  and  as  in  chapter  i 
we  shall  take  up  first  the  attitude  of  these  documents 
toward  foreign  nations  and  peoples.  There  is  not  the 
same  unmitigated  hostility  toward  foreigners  here  as  in 
the  historical  stories  in  Judges  and  Samuel.  The  story 
of  the  origins  of  Moab  and  Ammon,  figuratively  pre¬ 
sented  as  due  to  the  incest  of  the  daughters  of  Lot 
(Gen.  19:30-38,  J),  may  be  intended  as  a  disgraceful 
reflection  upon  the  character  of  those  peoples;  but  that 

*  See  Driver,  Gunkel,  Procksch,  Skinner,  and  Dilimann,  in  loc . 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


39 


this  was  J’s  point  of  view  is  by  no  means  certain — the 
exceptional  situation  may  have  been  regarded  as  warrant¬ 
ing  exceptional  conduct.  The  women  of  Moab  are  made 
the  occasion  of  Israel's  harlotry  and  apostasy  at  a  later 
day  (Num.  25 : 16  =  J).  The  patriarchs  made  treaties 
with  foreign  peoples  (Gen.  21:22-32,  E;  26 : 26 : ff.,  J; 
31:45-54,  E)  and  Joshua,  though  inveigled  into  a  treaty 
with  Gibeon,  nevertheless  adhered  to  its  terms  (Josh. 
9: 22  f.  =  JE).  On  the  other  hand,  no  blame  is  attached 
to  Moses  for  killing  an  Egyptian  (Exod.  2:11,  12,  J). 
Jacob  cheats  Esau  (representative  of  Edom)  out  of  his 
birthright  (Gen.  27:1-45,  J  and  E)  and  does  not  lose 
the  favor  of  Yahweh  thereby.  Jacob  likewise  tricks  his 
wily  father-in-law,  Laban  the  Syrian,  and  grows  rich  at 
his  expense  (Gen.  30:35-43,  J).  E’s  story  makes  Laban 
initiate  the  wrongdoing  (Gen.  29:21-23,  25;  31:4-18#). 
E  also  contributes  the  humorous  account  of  Rachel’s 
successful  theft  of  her  father’s  teraphim  (Gen.  31 : 19-35), 
and  represents  God  as  intervening  with  Laban  in  Jacob’s 
behalf  (Gen.  31:29).  In  this  connection,  attention  may 
be  called  to  the  popular  misinterpretation  of  the  Mizpah 
“ benediction ”  (Gen.  31:49).  In  its  original  sense,  it 
more  nearly  approached  a  curse  than  a  blessing.  As 
the  context  convincingly  shows,  the  heap  of  stones  was 
to  testify  to  a  contract  between  Jacob  and  Laban;  and 
the  God  of  the  contract  is  in  these  words  adjured  to 
keep  watch  over  the  fulfilment  of  its  terms  and  to  call 
to  account  either  party  transgressing  the  covenant.  Woe 
betide  such  transgressor!  Such  stories  as  these  at  the 
expense  of  Syria  would  be  more  than  welcome  in  the 
important  work  of  maintaining  the  morale  of  Israel  dur¬ 
ing  the  long  period  of  the  life-and-death  struggle  between 


40 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Damascus  and  Samaria,  which  was  finally  brought  to 
an  end  by  the  ruthless  hand  of  Assyria.  A  dastardly 
deed  of  treachery  is  recorded  of  Simeon  and  Levi  against 
the  clan  of  Shechem  (Gen.,  chap.  34,  J  and  E).  It  was 
not  without  provocation,  certainly,  in  the  rape  of  Dinah; 
but  the  angry  brothers  ignore  Shechem’s  desire  to  make 
amends,  slaughtering  him  and  all  the  males  of  his  clan. 
The  only  ground  of  protest  given  by  Jacob  is  that  his 
sons  have  made  it  unsafe  for  him  to  stay  in  those  parts. 
The  Blessing  of  Jacob,  however,  apparently  finds  the 
reason  for  the  later  misfortunes  of  Simeon  and  Levi  in  this 
massacre,  and  judges  their  wrath  to  have  been  accursed 
(Gen.  49:5-7,  J),  another  indication  of  ethical  progress. 

In  pre-prophetic  Israel  there  was  already  present  the 
consciousness  that,  as  the  people  of  Yahweh,  Israel  was 
sharply  differentiated  and  set  apart  from  all  the  neighbor¬ 
ing  peoples.  J  looks  upon  Israel  as  “the  special  posses¬ 
sion”  of  Yahweh  (Exod.  19:5);  and  only  by  a  mani¬ 
festation  of  the  presence  of  Yahweh  with  Israel  can  it  be 
known  that  his  people  are  separated  from  all  the  peoples 
of  the  land  (Exod.  33:16).  This  conviction  of  privilege 
was  later  to  yield  rich  fruitage. 

24.  Attitude  toward  women. — Coming  to  the  home  and 
neighborhood  ethics  of  the  Hebrews  as  reflected  in  the 
traditions  of  the  J  and  E  documents,  we  first  look  into 
their  treatment  of  women.  It  straightway  appears  that 
woman  as  the  weaker  vessel  is  made  responsible  for  man’s 
“first  disobedience”  and  all  its  fateful  outcome  of  woe 
(Gen.  3:1-6,  J).  The  low  estimate  placed  upon  women 
and  the  degree  to  which  they  were  subject  to  paternal 
authority  are  suggested  by  an  incidental  allusion  to  a 
common  custom  that  is  furnished  by  Numbers  12:14,  E. 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


41 


Speaking  of  Miriam,  for  whom  Moses  is  pleading,  God 
says,  “If  her  father  had  but  spit  in  her  face,  should 
she  not  be  unclean  for  seven  days?”  Polygamy  is  the 
order  of  the  day  in  these  documents;  a  man’s  harem  is 
limited  only  by  the  size  of  his  income  and  his  own  inclina¬ 
tion  (Gen.  16:2  ff . ;  22:24;  25:1;  29:26b;  32:22;  35: 
22 a;  49:4;  all  =  J ;  Gen.  29:21-23,  25  =E);  a  man 
might  even  take  two  sisters  to  wife  at  the  same  time. 
In  such  a  polygamous  society,  family  strife  is  inevitable 
(Gen.  16:2-6,  J).  Chivalry  is  conspicuous  by  its 
almost  total  absence.  Lot  offers  his  two  virgin  daugh¬ 
ters  to  the  passions  of  the  men  of  Sodom,  seeking  thereby 
to  save  his  guests  (Gen.  19:8,  J);  while  Abraham  passes 
Sarah  off  as  only  his  sister  and  imperils  her  honor  in 
order  to  save  his  own  life  (Gen.  20:1-18,  E).  Harlotry 
was  a  disgrace  for  a  woman,  but  apparently  attended 
with  no  serious  consequences  for  the  man,  at  least  when 
the  woman  was  a  recognized  professional  (Gen.  38:15, 
J;  Josh.  2:12-14,  JE).  But  there  was  a  strong  senti¬ 
ment  against  adultery  (Gen.  26:11,  J),  in  all  probability 
influenced  strongly  by  the  sense  of  property  rights.  And 
in  course  of  time,  harlotry  itself  came  to  be  punished  by 
the  burning  of  the  woman  (Gen.  38:24,  J);  and  rape, 
at  least  when  a  Canaanite  was  the  offender,  was  a  mortal 
offense  (Gen.  34:7,  J).  But  from  this  low  level  of 
sensuality  and  commercialism,  there  arise  a  few  points 
of  higher  altitude.  Abraham’s  sympathy  was  aroused 
by  the  plight  of  Hagar  (Gen.  2 1 : 1 1 ,  E) .  Joseph  repulsed 
the  advances  of  Potiphar’s  wife  (Gen.  39:6  ff.,  J). 
Moses  volunteered  his  aid  to  the  daughters  of  Jethro  in 
their  strife  with  the  shepherds  crowding  around  the 
well  (Exod.  2:17,  J).  Isaac  loved  Rebekah,  his  wife 


42 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


(Gen.  24:67,  J);  and  Jacob,  not  only  was  attracted  by 
Rachel  at  first  sight  (Gen.  29:11,  J),  but  had  for  her  an 
enduring  affection.  There  is  in  all  literature  no  more 
beautiful  and  telling  expression  of  strong  and  genuine  love 
than  that  describing  Jacob’s  feelings  for  Rachel:  “ Jacob 
served  seven  years  for  Rachel  and  they  seemed  to  him  but 
a  few  days  for  the  love  he  bare  her”  (Gen.  29:20,  J). 
This,  it  may  be  noted,  was  the  love  of  a  husband  for  his 
wife,  not  that  of  the  unmarried  lover.  In  such  sentiments 
as  these  lies  the  promise  of  a  better  day  for  women. 

25.  A  low  moral  plane. — The  general  moral  practices 
and  principles  current  among  the  Hebrews  remain  now 
for  consideration.  The  law  of  blood-revenge  was  bind¬ 
ing,  and  carried  the  blood-feud  in  its  train.  It  is  glorified 
in  the  savage  song  of  Lamech : 

Adah  and  Sillah,  hear  my  voice; 

Ye  wives  of  Lamech,  give  ear  to  my  speech! 

For  I  have  slain  a  man  for  a  wound  to  me, 

And  a  son  for  my  blow. 

Surely  Cain  is  avenged  seven  fold; 

But  Lamech  seventy  and  seven  fold  [Gen.  4:23  f.,  J]. 

The  same  strain  sounds  in  the  story  of  Cain  and  Abel 
(Gen.  4:9  ff.,  J);  the  blood  of  Abel  calls  unto  Yahweh 
for  vengeance.  The  story,  of  course,  shows  that  fratri¬ 
cide,  at  least,  was  condemned  by  the  early  Hebrew  con¬ 
science,  as  does  also  the  story  of  Joseph’s  treatment  by 
his  jealous  brothers  (Gen.  37 : 27,  J).  Theft  was  a  crime 
if  the  victim  were  a  pious  Hebrew,  but  was  passed  over 
lightly  under  other  circumstances.  Rachel  steals  her 
father’s  idol,  and  is  not  condemned  (Gen.  31:19,  E); 
the  Hebrews  despoil  the  Egyptians  at  the  command  of 
Yahweh  (Exod.  3:22,  E) ;  and  Achan’s  theft  was  a  fatal 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


43 


crime  because  he  took  what  was  under  the  ban  (Josh. 
7:1-26,  JE).  The  drunkenness  of  Noah  is  not  ex¬ 
plicitly  condemned  (nor  is  that  of  Lot),  but  Canaan 
brings  a  curse  upon  himself  for  his  attitude  of  disrespect 
toward  his  drunken  father  (Gen.  9:20-27,  J).  Lying 
and  deceit  are  treated  as  common  human  characteristics 
(Num.  23:19,  E)  and  sometimes  succeed  in  their  ends. 
Sarah  in  fear  lied  to  Yahweh,  who  by  his  divine  percep¬ 
tion  immediately  read  her  mind  (Gen.  18:15,  J). 
Abraham  and  Isaac  are  represented  as  telling  half- 
truths  in  order  to  save  their  lives  (Gen.  20:1-18,  E; 
26:6,  J).  Rebekah  and  Jacob  conspired  to  deceive 
Isaac  and  their  end  was  accomplished  even  though  it 
involved  Yahweh’s  accepting  their  deceit  (Gen.  27:5  ff., 
J).  Jacob’s  whole  record  is  smirched  with  trickery. 
The  habit  of  lying  and  cheating  was  so  common  that 
it  was  thought  necessary  that  the  parties  to  a  contract 
should  be  bound  by  oath  to  keep  their  word  and  fulfil  their 
promises  (Gen.  24: 2;  25:31  ff.;  26 : 26 ff. ;  47:29ft.;  50:4-6 
[all  from  J];  Gen.  21:22-32;  50:25  [  =  E]).  The  essen¬ 
tial  primitivity  of  this  sort  of  thing  is  suggested  by  the 
fact  that  in  some  cases  the  oath  was  taken  with  the 
hand  upon  the  genital  organs  of  the  other  party  (Gen. 
24:1  ff.;  47:29  ff.,  J).  This  list  of  offenses  may  close 
with  the  condemnation  of  unnatural,  sexual  indulgence 
furnished  in  connection  with  two  cases  (Gen.  19:5, 

J;  38:8  ff.,  j). 

26.  The  virtues  of  Israel  reflected  in  the  records  in 
J  and  E  are  more  conspicuous  than  the  sins.  The  pur¬ 
pose  of  these  documents  would  itself  require  this.  The 
makers  of  these  narratives  were  seeking  by  means  of 
them  to  preach  religion  to  their  contemporaries.  They 


44 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


were  pointing  them  to  the  Israel  of  the  past  in  order  that 
they  might  warn  them  by  its  faults  and  stimulate  them 
by  the  recital  of  its  virtues.  It  would  have  been  poor 
homiletics  to  have  made  the  record  of  the  fathers 
thoroughly  bad;  it  was  much  better  to  enlarge  upon  the 
good  and  to  seek  to  arouse  a  rivalry  in  good  deeds  on  the 
part  of  the  children.  Furthermore,  the  records  are 
essentially  true.  No  society  of  men  is  wholly  bad. 
The  good  predominates  everywhere  and  comes  to  expres¬ 
sion  in  many  ways. 

a)  A  fundamental  conviction  with  the  makers  of 
these  documents,  as  with  all  prophetically  minded 
teachers  of  the  pre-exilic  period,  was  that  piety  was 
always  rewarded  by  prosperity .  All  the  great  and  good 
men  of  these  narratives  are  blessed  with  riches  and 
success.  We  are  expressly  told  that  “  Abraham  was 
very  rich  in  cattle,  in  silver,  and  in  gold”  (Gen.  13 : 2,  J). 
Isaac  inherited  all  that  was  his  father’s,  and  Jacob  waxed 
rich  at  the  expense  of  his  Syrian  father-in-law.  Moses 
and  Joshua,  though  severely  tried  on  more  than  one 
occasion,  nevertheless  won  glorious  success  finally  over 
all  obstacles  and  in  spite  of  every  enemy.  Joseph  could 
not  be  kept  down.  The  nation  as  a  whole  prospered  or 
languished  in  proportion  as  it  was  obedient  to  the  will  of 
God.  This  theory  in  general  held  good  for  Hebrew  thought 
until  the  tragic  days  of  the  Exile,  when  some  revision 
of  it  became  imperative,  if  faith  in  God  was  to  survive. 

b )  Some  admirable  personal  qualities  appear  in  the 
lives  of  the  patriarchs  and  other  heroes  of  the  J  and  E 
traditions.  Abraham  is  credited  with  great  magnanimity 
in  the  account  of  his  dealings  with  Lot,  to  whom  he  gives 
the  first  choice  of  pasture  land,  taking  what  was  left  for 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


45 


himself  (Gen.  13 : 7  ff.,  J).  Joseph  displayed  even  greater 
forbearance  and  charity  in  his  treatment  of  his  brethren 
when  he  had  them  in  his  power  and  chose  to  forego  his 
opportunity  for  vengeance  (Gen.  45:1a,  4 b,  5 a,  J; 
50:15-21,  E).  A  gracious  and  generous  hospitality  is 
accredited  to  Abraham  when  he  entertains  the  three  men 
who  turn  out  to  be  heavenly  visitors  (Gen.  18:  iff., 
J).  A  similar  spirit  is  shown  by  Lot  when  he  shelters 
the  angelic  visitors  to  Sodom  and  defends  them  against 
the  brutality  of  the  Sodomites  (Gen.  19:1  ff.,  J).  Moses 
likewise  met  with  gratitude  and  courteous  hospitality  at 
the  hands  of  Jethro,  in  return  for  Moses’  aid  to  his 
daughters  (Exod.  2:195.,  E).1 

c )  The  family  life ,  polygamous  as  it  was,  nevertheless 
left  room  for  the  manifestation  of  affection  among  its 
members.  The  ideal  of  genuine  love  between  husband 
and  wife  we  have  seen  illustrated  in  the  cases  of  Isaac 
and  Rebekah  and  Jacob  and  Rachel.  Jacob  also  shows 
great  affection  for  his  children,  and  particularly  for 
Joseph  and  Benjamin  (Gen.  37:3,  35,  J).  Mothers, 
too,  naturally  displayed  their  love  for  their  children, 

1  It  must  be  noted  that  the  guest  right  of  the  ancient  world  and  the 
practice  of  kindness  to  strangers  was  perhaps  not  so  altruistic  as  it  seems 
to  us.  Anthropologists  claim  that  such  practices  arise  out  of  fear  and 
caution.  The  usages  and  rights  operative  within  the  family  or  clan 
are  clearly  understood  and  generally  respected  and  upheld.  When  a 
stranger  appears,  a  member  of  an  alien  group  or  clan,  he  represents 
customs  and  rights  that  are  not  familiar  and  is  under  the  protection  of 
gods  and  demons  that  are  not  known  or  understood.  Therefore  the 
safe  thing  is  to  treat  him  with  every  possible  courtesy  that  neither  he 
nor  his  clan,  nor  his  protecting  spirits  or  gods  may  be  incensed  and 
stirred  up  to  avenge  neglect  or  wrong  that  he  might  otherwise  suffer. 
Such  a  state  of  fear  would  somewhat  mitigate  our  condemnation  of  such 
deeds  as  the  surrender  of  women  to  the  passions  of  the  mob  in  order 
that  guests  may  be  unharmed. 


46 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


though  express  statements  to  that  effect  are  lacking;  but 
Rebekah,  though  she  inspired  Jacob  and  connived  with 
him  to  cheat  Esau  out  of  his  right  as  first-born,  never¬ 
theless  did  not  look  with  equanimity  upon  the  possibility 
of  losing  both  her  sons  (Gen.  27:41-45  J).  A  mother’s 
love  is  likewise  recognizable  in  the  story  of  Hagar 
(Gen.  21:14-16,  E),  as  also  in  that  of  Moses’  birth 
(Exod.  2:1-10,  E).  Respect  and  affection  for  parents 
on  the  part  of  their  children  were  not  lacking.  Canaan’s 
ridicule  of  his  drunken  father,  Noah,  is  the  exception, 
not  the  rule.  Judah’s  solicitude  for  his  aged  father  is 
beautifully  brought  out  in  Judah’s  plea  to  Joseph  (Gen. 
44:18-34,  J).  A  similar  care  is  attributed  to  Reuben 
in  the  story  of  Joseph’s  sale  into  Egypt  (Gen.  37:21  f.,  J). 
In  one  case,  at  least,  the  possibility  of  fraternal  affection 
is  recognized,  viz.,  when  Joseph  reveals  himself  to  his 
brother  Benjamin  (Gen.  43:29!!.,  J).  In  another  case, 
fraternal  solicitude  for  a  sister’s  reputation  finds  some¬ 
what  exaggerated  expression  (Gen.  34).  A  certain 
responsibility  was  recognized  as  obligatory  upon  broth¬ 
ers,  even  though  only  half-brothers  (Gen.  37:27,  J). 
Indeed,  this  went  so  far  in  one  particular  as  to  make  it 
obligatory  upon  a  brother  to  marry  the  widow  of  a 
brother  dying  without  children  and  to  rear  the  first 
child  of  this  marriage  as  the  child  of  the  dead  brother 
(Gen.  38:8  fif.,  J).1 

d )  Standards  for  public  servants. — When  Jethro  ad¬ 
vised  Moses  to  unload  some  of  his  responsibilities  in 
the  administration  of  justice  and  to  transfer  them  to  the 
shoulders  of  subordinates,  he  was  careful  to  describe  the 

1  The  inner  significance  of  this  custom  may  originally  have  lain  in 
the  belief  in  ancestor  worship  which  was  prevalent  in  the  Semitic  world . 


THE  TRADITIONS  OF  EARLY  ISRAEL 


47 


kind  of  men  suitable  for  the  office  of  judge  (Exod.  18:21, 
E).  They  should  be  capable,  pious,  truthful,  and  incor¬ 
ruptible,  which  being  interpreted  means,  not  susceptible 
to  bribery.  Those  qualifications  would  go  far  toward 
satisfying  the  requirements  of  the  office  today.  Moses 
himself  is  given  credit  for  having  been  the  most  humble 
man  upon  the  face  of  the  ground  (Num.  12:3,  E),  an 
ascription  which  shows  that  an  unselfish  life  was  already 
in  this  period  recognized  as  ideal.  This  self-eliminating 
characteristic  of  Moses  comes  to  finest  expression  in  the 
account  of  Moses’  attitude  in  connection  with  the  worship 
of  the  golden  calf  in  the  desert  (Exod.  32:30-32,  J): 
“And  it  came  to  pass  on  the  morrow,  that  Moses  said 
to  the  people,  ‘You  have  sinned  a  great  sin;  and  now 
I  will  go  up  unto  Yahweh,  perad venture  I  shall  make 
atonement  for  your  sin.’  And  Moses  returned  to 
Yahweh,  and  said:  ‘Alas!  this  people  has  sinned  a  great 
sin  in  that  they  have  made  for  themselves  gods  of  gold. 
And  now,  if  thou  wilt  pardon  their  sin — but  if  not,  then 
blot  me  out  from  thy  book  which  thou  hast  written.’” 

YFhis  is  an  ideal  of  utter  devotion  to  the  public  good  that 
can  hardly  be  surpassed. 

27.  The  nature  of  evil. — We  close  our  study  of  these 
traditions  with  the  citation  of  two  episodes  which  reveal 
a  high  conception  of  the  nature  of  sin  or  moral  evil. 
When  Joseph’s  brethren  first  met  with  difficulty  at 
Pharaoh’s  court,  they  at  once  began  to  be  troubled  in 
conscience  over  their  former  maltreatment  of  Joseph; 
their  own  consciences  condemned  them  (Gen.  42:21  f., 
E).  They  recognized  that  the  responsibility  for  the 
wrong  done  to  Joseph  rested  upon  themselves  and  could 
not  be  escaped.  Still  more  penetrating  is  the  view  of 


48 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  nature  of  sin  in  the  story  of  the  Fall  (Gen.  3:1  ff., 
J).  This  is  not  merely  a  description  of  the  first  man’s 
sin,  but  is  also  a  diagnosis  of  every  man’s  sin.  The 
responsibility  for  sin  is  placed  not  upon  the  flesh  in 
contradistinction  from  the  spirit,  but  is  traced  back  to 
its  native  lair,  the  will  of  man.  This  is  fundamental  in 
Hebrew  ethics.  Never  is  there  any  effort  to  shield  the 
sinner  from  the  punishment  due  him  on  the  ground  that 
he  is  not  morally  responsible  or  that  he  is  bound  by  influ¬ 
ences  beyond  his  control.  The  attitude  toward  the 
transgressor  throughout  the  Old  Testament  presupposes 
that  it  is  in  the  sinner’s  power  to  turn  from  his  evil  way, 
if  he  but  wills  to  do  so.  The  responsibility  for  not  doing 
so  is  his  own. 

The  knowledge  of  “good  and  evil”  and  the  ability 
to  discriminate  between  them  is  recognized  by  the  J 
document  as  conferring  a  godlike  quality  upon  man¬ 
kind  (Gen.  3 : 22,  J).1  It  is  that  which  raises  him  immeas¬ 
urably  above  the  brute.  He  needs  only  eternal  life  with 
all  that  it  involves  to  make  him  a  truly  divine  being. 
As  it  is,  the  divine  breath  of  life  which  is  from  God  is 
wedded  to,  and  hampered  by,  a  body  formed  of  the 
“dust  of  the  earth.”  Death  ends  this  unequal  yoking 
together,  and  the  material  part  of  man  that  came  from 
the  dust  returns  to  the  dust  (Gen.  3:19,  J).  The  early 
Hebrew  concerned  himself  but  little  with  the  fate  of 
the  spirit  of  man. 

1  The  terms  “good”  and  “evil”  here  were  originally  applied  not 
exclusively  or  primarily  to  moral  issues.  They  meant  rather,  things 
that  were  beneficial  and  things  that  were  harmful,  respectively.  The 
eating  of  the  forbidden  fruit  opened  man’s  eyes  so  that  he  could  discern 
the  difference  between  that  which  was  useful  and  that  which  was  useless 
or  worse.  It  is  the  dawn  of  practical  intelligence  that  is  here  described^ 


CHAPTER  III 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 

28.  The  rise  of  law. — The  bodies  of  law  that  constitute 
our  source-material  in  this  chapter  are  known  as  the 
Covenant  Code  and  the  Decalogue.  The  Covenant  Code 
is  recorded  in  two  recensions,  the  one,  Exodus  20:23 — 
23:33,  occurring  as  a  part  of  the  E  narrative;  the 
other,  Exodus,  chap.  34,  being  found  in  the  J  narrative. 
The  Decalogue  likewise  appears  in  two  forms,  one  in 
Exodus,  chapter  20,  the  other  in  Deuteronomy,  chap¬ 
ter  5 ;  the  earlier  form  is  that  in  Exodus  and  that  will  be 
used  here.1 

a)  Before  entering  upon  an  examination  of  the  ethical 
content  of  these  codes  a  word  or  two  by  way  of  intro¬ 
duction  is  required.  Codes  of  law  grow  slowly.  They  are 
bodies  of  law  that  bring  together  in  concise  and  accessible 
form  the  usages  and  decisions  that  have  grown  up  in 
previous  decades  or  centuries  and  are  still  in  force. 
Laws  are  of  two  kinds,  consuetudinary  or  customary, 
and  statutory.  The  former  consist  of  the  customs  and 
practices  generally  accepted  in  the  social  and  economic 
life;  the  latter  are  the  decisions  of  kings  or  great  leaders, 
priests,  and  judges,  formulated  from  time  to  time  as 

1  There  is  also  a  third  recension  of  the  Decalogue  recorded  on  a  bit 
of  papyrus  and  offering  variations  from  the  other  two.  This  is  known 
as  the  Nash  Papyrus  and  is  published  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Society 
of  Biblical  Archaeology,  XXV  (1903),  34  ff.,  by  S.  A.  Cook;  and  by 
F.  C.  Burkitt,  in  Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  XV  (1903),  392-408;  and 
XXI  (1904),  559-61;  and  by  N.  Peters,  Die  diteste  Abschrift  der  Zchn 
Gebote,  der  Papyrus  Nash  (1905). 


49 


50 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


critical  cases  arise  and  serving  as  precedents  for  similar 
cases  thereafter.  This  being  the  case,  the  codification 
of  law  is  necessarily  the  final  stage  of  development. 
The  code  is  the  end  of  the  legal  process,  not  its  beginning. 
This  means  that  the  laws  of  the  Covenant  Code  and 
the  Decalogue  were  developing  down  through  our  pre- 
prophetic  period,  but  that  in  their  present  form  as  codes 
they  represent  the  close  of  the  period  rather  than  its 
opening.  We  cannot  trace  the  history  of  the  rise  of  these 
codes  in  detail,  but  must  content  ourselves  with  treating 
them  as  units  representative  of  the  life  and  thought  of 
the  latter  part  of  our  period. 

b)  A  second  fact  must  be  noted.  The  laws  of  a 
people  are  never  on  a  par  with  the  best  thought  and  senti¬ 
ment  of  that  people.  Law  always  lags  behind  the  develop¬ 
ing  social  conscience.1  The  reasons  for  this  are  obvious. 
The  makers  of  the  law  and  its  chief  executors  are  always 
“the  elders ”  of  the  people.  They  represent  the  ideas 
and  ideals  of  the  generation  that  is  passing  off  the  stage. 
Youth  has  little  if  any  voice  in  such  matters.  More¬ 
over,  the  substantial  people  of  any  society  have  acquired 
their  property,  influence,  and  power  under  the  operation 
of  existing  laws,  and  their  influence  in  general  is  thrown 
against  any  new  legislation  that  bids  fair  to  work  a 
change  that  will  imperil  their  hard- won  gains.  There 
are  “vested  interests’*  in  every  social  order.  Then,  too, 
the  developing  social  consciousness  of  the  rising  genera¬ 
tion  is  not  sufficiently  unified  to  permit  its  crystalliza¬ 
tion  into  law.  The  crying  social  needs  of  the  time  call 
forth  different  proposals  for  remedy,  and  discussion 

1  See  R.  E.  Park  and  E.  W.  Burgess,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of 
Society  (1921),  pp.  449  f. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


5i 


regarding  these  waxes  hot;  parties  are  formed,  and  legis¬ 
lative  action  waits  upon  the  requisite  education  of  the 
public  mind  as  a  whole.  This  gap  between  the  higher 
standards  of  a  people  and  its  legal  enactments  is,  of 
course,  most  marked  in  a  democratically  organized 
society.  But  though  perhaps  not  so  pronounced  in  a 
patriarchal  or  despotically  organized  society  it  is  none 
the  less  real.  No  ruler,  or  rulers,  can  long  disregard 
with  impunity  the  sentiments  of  his  people.  His  arbi- 

1 

trary  power  is  always  limited  by  the  power  of  public 
opinion;  and  public  opinion  resents  being  compelled 
to  conform  to  higher  standards  than  it  recognizes  as 
binding,  just  as  keenly  as  it  resents  oppression  of 
any  other  sort.  This  means,  then,  as  applied  to  our 
Hebrew  codes,  that  the  standards  of  these  codes  are 
standards  generally  accepted  by  the  people  of  Israel 
and  that  they  are  not  the  idealistic  legislation  of  one  or 
more  forward-looking  individuals.  We  are  not  here 
listening  to  somebody  standing  head  and  shoulders 
above  the  people  of  his  generation,  as  is  true  of  some  of 
the  great  prophets,  but  we  hear  rather  the  mighty 
voice  of  the  great  public  declaring  its  accepted  principles. 

29.  The  ethical  aspect  of  the  conception  of  God  is  but 
scantily  represented  in  these  early  laws.  In  a  certain 
sense,  indeed,  God  is  presupposed  as  behind  all  these 
laws  and  as  giving  them  the  indorsement  of  his  authority. 
These  legal  principles  and  practices  doubtless  grew  out 
of  the  social  need  in  Israel  as  they  did  everywhere  else, 
but  by  the  time  of  the  J  and  E  documents  they  had 
achieved  divine  sanction,  being  promulgated  as  the 
oracles  of  God.  A  few  laws  reflect  the  ethics  of  the 
God-idea  directly.  Both  Exodus  22:29  f.  and  34:19 


52 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


record  a  law  requiring  the  offering  of  the  first-born  to 
Yahweh;  the  latter  passage  puts  it  upon  the  same  basis 
with  the  sacrifice  of  the  firstlings  of  oxen  and  sheep  on 
the  eighth  day — but  the  J  code  hastens  to  add,  “the 
first-born  of  thy  sons  thou  shalt  redeem.”  It  is  alto¬ 
gether  probable  that  at  an  early  date  in  Israel,  as  also 
among  the  Canaanites,  the  actual  sacrifice  of  the  first¬ 
born  was  demanded.  But  the  social  conscience  of  Israel 
had  risen  above  this  level  by  the  time  of  our  oldest  sources 
of  information.  Samuel,  Jephthah’s  daughter,  Samson, 
SamueFs  son  Joel,  and  David’s  brother  Eliab  were  all 
first-born  children  of  their  mothers.  Hence  clearly  the 
ancient  law  was  more  often  honored  in  the  breach  than 
in  the  observance.  At  any  rate,  the  form  of  the  law  in 
Exodus,  chapter  34  shows  that  the  public  conscience  had 
outgrown  the  primitive  custom. 

a)  A  primitive  custom  that  continued  and  found  the 
indorsement  of  the  early  Hebrew  codes  is  that  of  the 
ordeal .  It  is  provided  for  as  a  means  of  testing  innocence 
in  Exodus  22:8-11.  Such  an  institution  quite  evi¬ 
dently  presupposes  a  conviction  that  God  can  discern 
things  hidden  from  the  eye  of  man  and  can  be  depended 
upon  to  detect  the  guilty  and  to  punish  him  appro¬ 
priately.  It  also  recognizes  the  fact  that  under  certain 
circumstances  where  all  evidence  is  lacking  and  no  wit¬ 
nesses  can  be  found,  some  men  will  lie  unless  they  be 
held  in  check  by  fear  of  the  wrath  of  a  just  God.  The 
penalty  of  death  is  pronounced  upon  witches1  and 
likewise  upon  those  who  sacrifice  to  other  gods  than 
Yahweh.2  Reverence  toward  God  and  respect  for 
rulers  are  enjoined  together  in  one  and  the  same  law.3 

2  Exod.  22:20.  3  Exod.  22:28. 


1  Exod.  22:18. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


53 


The;  conception  of  holiness  moves  in  the  sphere  of  the 
metaphysical  rather  than  the  ethical,  for  Israel’s  <c holi¬ 
ness”  is  imperiled  by  the  eating  of  the  flesh  of  animals 
torn  by  wild  beasts.1  Accidental  homicide  is  laid  upon 
the  shoulders  of  God  rather  than  those  of  the  uninten¬ 
tional  slayer.2  Such  primitive  conceptions  are  apt  to 
linger  longer  in  the  sphere  of  the  conception  of  God 
than  elsewhere.  This  is  not  surprising  when  we  realize 
that  to  ethicize  is.  to  humanize. 

30.  Property  rights. — The  legislation  of  the  Covenant 
Code  and  the  Decalogue  is  on  the  whole,  in  so  far  as  it 
has  to  do  with  the  field  of  ethics,  equally  interested  in 
persons  and  things.  Property  rights  and  personal 
rights  are  each  protected  by  approximately  the  same 
number  of  laws.  In  two  cases,  significantly  enough,  viz., 
slaves  and  women,  the  categories  of  persons  and  property 
are  inextricably  intertwined.  But  the  dominant  interest 
in  both  cases  is  that  of  property.  Hence  we  shall  classify 
them  there.  The  laws  regarding  property  are  character¬ 
istic  of  a  simple  society  with  predominantly  agricultural 
interests.  The  complications  arising  from  trade  and 
commerce  and  industrial  organization  are  entirely  lack¬ 
ing.  In  this  respect  it  differs  greatly  from  the  life  for 
which  Hammurabi’s  Code  was  prepared. 

a)  Theft  is  prohibited  by  both  Hebrew  codes  (Exod. 
22: 1-4 ;3  20:15),  but  the  simple  prohibition  of  the 

Decalogue  is  elaborated  with  reference  to  specific  cases 
in  the  Covenant  Code.  Apparently  no  penalty  was 

1  Exod.  22:31. 

2  Exod.  21:13. 

3  These  verses  are  perhaps  disarranged.  In  any  case  vss.  36  and 
4  continue  the  thought  of  vs.  1. 


54 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


attached  to  this  crime  other  than  that  of  making  costly 
restitution :  in  case  the  thief  kill  or  sell  the  stolen  animal, 
he  must  repay  fourfold  for  sheep  and  fivefold  for  ox; 
but  if  it  be  found  in  his  possession  still  alive,  the  restitu¬ 
tion  need  only  be  double.  This  is  an  interesting  dis¬ 
crimination,  based  presumably  upon  the  feeling  that  the 
man  who  does  not  go  to  the  point  of  killing  or  selling  the 
stolen  animal  is  not  so  far  advanced  in  crime  as  he  who 
does  sell  or  kill.  In  connection  with  this  crime  another 
discrimination  is  made  that  shows  a  sense  of  right:  if 
a  thief  is  caught  breaking  into  an  inclosure  at  night 
and  is  slain,  the  slayer  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  blood- 
revenge;  but  if  under  similar  circumstances  he  be  slain 
by  day,  the  avenger  of  blood  has  full  right  of  way. 

b)  Closely  related  to  theft  is  the  abuse  of  trusteeship 
or  guardianship  (Exod.  22:7-13).  If  the  trustee  has 
stolen  the  property  put  in  his  charge  and  the  theft  is 
proved,  he  pays  double  as  in  the  case  of  the  ordinary 
thief.  If  the  trustee  declares  his  innocence  and  no 
convincing  proof  is  at  hand,  the  owner  must  abide  by 
the  decision  of  God,  expressed  through  some  kind  of 
ordeal.  If  the  accused  is  condemned  of  God,  he  pays 
double  for  his  theft,  and  apparently  suffers  no  addi¬ 
tional  penalty  for  lying.  If  the  animal  intrusted  to 
another  come  to  mishap,  nobody  knowing  how  the  dam¬ 
age  was  done,  the  same  settlement  by  ordeal  is  provided 
for,  and  if  the  guardian  is  acquitted  by  God,  no  restitu¬ 
tion  is  made.  But  if  the  animal  be  stolen  from  the 
guardian,  he  is  held  responsible  and  must  make  restitu¬ 
tion;  he  should  have  taken  better  precautions.  If, 
however,  a  wild  beast  kills  the  intrusted  animal  and 
the  guardian  can  produce  some  fragments  in  proof, 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


55 


he  is  free  from  responsibility.  Likewise  a  borrower 
is  not  held  responsible  for  damage  or  death  of  a  bor¬ 
rowed  animal,  if  the  owner  was  along  with  it  at  the 
time;  but  if  the  owner  was  not  along,  the  borrower 
must  make  good  the  loss.  That  is  to  say,  when  a  man 
goes  out  with  his  ox  or  ass  to  work,  he  must  take  the  risks 
involved;  but  if  his  own  personal  supervision  is  dis¬ 
pensed  with,  the  hirer  must  take  the  risks. 

c)  Carelessness  resulting  in  damage  to  other  people’s 
property  is  also  penalized.  If  a  man  leave  a  hole  uncov¬ 
ered  and  an  animal  fall  therein  and  die,  the  careless  one 
must  give  another  animal  in  place  of  the  dead  one,  and 
take  the  dead  one  for  himself  (Exod.  2 1 : 33  f.) .  A 
rough  sense  of  justice  is  seen  in  the  case  of  an  ox  goring 
another  man’s  ox  to  death.  If  it  is  the  ox’s  first  offense, 
the  ox  is  sold  and  the  price  divided  between  the  two  men, 
and  the  dead  ox  is  likewise  divided.  This,  of  course, 
leaves  both  men  with  equal  values  at  the  close  of  the 
transaction,  though  the  one  ox  may  have  been  much 
more  valuable  than  the  other  when  both  were  alive. 
But  the  more  valuable  ox  would  almost  certainly  be  the 
bigger  and  stronger  animal  and  the  loss,  therefore,  would 
fall  upon  the  man  whose  ox  caused  the  trouble.  But  if 
the  goring  ox  was  known  to  be  dangerous,  the  owner 
should  have  kept  him  under  control  and  must  make  good 
the  loss  to  the  other  man,  taking  the  dead  ox  for  himself 
(Exod.  21:35  f •)  *  Similarly,  the  man  who  lets  his 
cattle  run  wild,  must  pay  the  damage  to  his  neighbor’s 
crops  or  vineyard  by  giving  of  the  best  of  his  own  (Exod. 
22:5).  Likewise,  he  who  kindles  fire  carelessly  and 
causes  damage  to  his  neighbor’s  crops,  must  recompense 
his  neighbor  for  his  loss  (Exod.  22:6). 


56 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


d )  The  laws  regarding  slavery  are  relatively  numerous 
and  explicit,  showing  that  the  institution  was  well 
developed  in  early  Israel  (Exod.  21:2-11,  20,  32).  All 
the  regulations  are  concerned  with  the  Hebrew  slaves 
only;  presumably,  captives  in  war  had  few,  if  any,  rights 
that  Hebrews  were  bound  to  respect.  Hebrews  became 
slaves  to  fellow-Hebrews  either  in  payment  of  debts 
which  they  were  unable  to  pay  otherwise;  or  in  the 
case  of  girls,  by  being  sold  by  their  fathers  for  what  they 
would  bring  as  wives  and  concubines  (Exod.  21:7). 
Hebrew  men  who  became  slaves  were  given  their  freedom 
after  six  years  of  service;  but  no  such  boon  was  available 
for  women  slaves  (Exod.  21:7).  If  a  slave  wife  were 
not  pleasing  to  her  owner,  he  could  “let  her  be  redeemed,” 
presumably  by  any  relative  who  might  be  able  and 
willing;  if  no  such  redeemer  was  forthcoming,  the 
husband  seems  to  have  had  the  right  to  sell  her  to  a 
Hebrew  purchaser,  but  he  might  not  sell  her  to  foreigners 
in  view  of  his  failure  to  maintain  her  in  her  proper 
status  as  a  wife.  Such  a  law  shows  that  the  slave  wife 
or  concubine  was  not  looked  upon  altogether  as  a  thing 
that  might  be  bought  and  sold;  she  was  recognized  as 
having  some  personal  rights.  The  dependence  of  chil¬ 
dren  upon  the  mother  was,  of  course,  the  reason  for 
denying  the  slave  woman  the  right  of  release  in  the 
seventh  year.  If  a  man  and  wife  fell  into  slavery,  the 
wife  went  free  with  her  husband  at  the  end  of  six  years; 
but  if  the  wife  had  been  given  to  the  slave  by  his  master, 
then  both  wife  and  children  remained  the  property  of 
the  master,  though  the  slave  husband  went  out  free. 
Naturally,  under  such  circumstances,  some  slaves  would 
prefer  to  remain  slaves  rather  than  be  deprived  of  their 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


57 


families;  if  so,  they  bound  themselves  to  life-long 
servitude. 

e)  The  purity  of  the  slaveholder’s  polygamous  family 
is  carefully  guarded.  If  a  man  give  one  of  his  slave 
girls  to  his  son  as  wife,  he  must  henceforth  treat  her 
like  his  own  daughter,  no  matter  what  his  previous 
relations  with  her  have  been.  If  a  slave- owner  takes  a 
second  slave  wife,  alongside  of  the  first,  he  must  in  no 
wise  fail  in  his  duty  of  maintenance  and  of  marriage  to 
the  first  wife,  on  penalty  of  her  becoming  a  free  woman 
if  he  does.  Such  a  law  was  evidently  intended  to 
militate  against  mistreatment  of  slave  women  by  their 
masters  and  to  put  a  check  upon  the  slaveholder’s  lust. 

/)  The  slave  had  little  protection  against  personal 
violence  other  than  his  own  money  value  to  his  owner. 
If  an  angry  or  cruel  owner  beat  a  slave  to  death  on  the 
spot,  he  is  punished  in  some  undefined  way  for  the  deed. 
But  if  the  slave  survive  the  beating  for  a  day  or  two, 
the  master  goes  scot  free;  “Is  he  not  his  money?” 
The  apparent  reason  for  discrimination  here  lies  in  the 
presumption  that  if  the  slave  die  under  the  beater’s 
hands,  that  was  the  end  sought  by  the  enraged  master; 
but  if  he  survive  a  few  days,  then  the  master  evidently 
did  not  intend  to  kill  him  and  is  punished  enough  by  the 
loss  of  a  valuable  bit  of  property.  The  motive  of  the 
master  is  the  determining  factor  in  the  decision.  The 
person  of  the  slave  is  protected  against  violence  still 
further  by  the  law  that  the  master  who  puts  out  a  slave’s 
eye  or  knocks  out  a  tooth  must  free  the  injured  slave 
as  compensation.  The  value  of  a  slave  is  fixed  by  the 
law  that  his  owner  must  be  given  thirty  pieces  of  silver 
if  the  slave  be  gored  to  death  by  another  man’s  ox 


58 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


(Exod.  21:32).  With  slaves  as  valuable  property,  it 
was  inevitable  that  some  rascals  would  not  hesitate  to 
steal  a  man,  if  occasion  presented  itself  or  could  be 
found,  and  sell  him  into  slavery  or  add  him  to  their  own 
list  of  slaves.  Consequently  the  death  penalty  is  pro¬ 
vided  for  such  cases  (Exod.  21:16). 

g)  Woman  as  such  receives  no  consideration  in  these 
codes.  It  is  only  in  her  capacity  as  actual  or  potential 
wife  and  mother  that  she  becomes  the  subject  of  legisla¬ 
tion  and  that,  for  the  most  part,  upon  a  property  basis. 
If  a  man  seduces  an  unbetrothed  virgin,  he  must  take 
her  to  wife,  if  her  father  consents,  and  must  pay  the  full 
dowry;  but  if  the  father  refuses  to  give  her  to  him,  he 
must  pay  the  dowry  notwithstanding  (Exod.  22:16). 
The  obvious  reason  for  this  is  that  the  girl’s  monetary 
value  as  a  potential  bride  is  seriously  impaired.  The 
woman  in  the  case  is  at  the  disposal  of  her  father  and 
has  no  rights  of  her  own;  she  must  enforce  her  claims 
through  him.  In  the  case  of  a  woman  with  child  who 
is  accidentally  injured  by  another  than  her  husband  so 
that  miscarriage  results,  the  author  of  the  injury  must 
pay  such  a  fine  as  the  husband  determines,  but  with 
right  of  appeal  to  the  judges  whose  decree  is  final.  If 
still  more  serious  injury  follows  the  accident,  then  the 
lex  talionis  operates,  “life  for  life,  eye  for  eye,  tooth  for 
tooth,  hand  for  hand,  foot  for  foot,  burning  for  burning, 
wound  for  wound,  stripe  for  stripe”  (Exod.  21:22-25). 
The  sin  of  adultery  is  prohibited  by  the  seventh  command 
of  the  Decalogue — a  bare  prohibition  with  no  conditions 
or  penalties  attached.  Whether  the  motive  of  the 
prohibition  belonged  in  the  property  or  personal  sphere, 
we  have  no  means  of  knowing. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


59 


31.  Personal  rights. — Moving  over  into  the  area  of 
personal  rights  and  interests,  we  observe  that  while 
many  of  these  laws  have  social  implications,  social 
legislation  as  such  is  for  the  most  part  lacking.  Men 
are  dealt  with  primarily  as  individuals,  not  as  social 
groups,  or  organized  bodies.  Undue  exposure  of  the 
person  is  provided  against  in  the  law  prohibiting  an 
approach  by  steps  unto  the  altar  of  Yahweh  (Exod. 
20:26).  Indulgence  in  unnatural  lust  is  punished  by 
death  (Exod.  22:19).  The  list  of  capital  crimes  is  brief, 
including  only  deliberate  murder  in  general  (Exod.  21: 
12,  14),  (though  not  accidental  homicide  which  is 
apparently  without  penalty  [21:13]),  and  patricide  and 
matricide  in  particular  (21:15),  the  laying  of  a  curse  upon 
father  or  mother  (21:17;  cf.  the  fifth  commandment  of 
the  Decalogue,  20:12,  where  positive  honoring  of  parents 
is  enjoined),  man-stealing  (21:16),  sacrifice  to  other 
gods  (22:20),  sorcery  (22:18),  and  keeping  a  vicious  ox 
which  kills  a  free  man  (21:29-31).  The  brevity  of  this 
list  compares  very  favorably  with  the  long  list  of  capital 
crimes  in  many  Christian  countries  up  to  within  quite 
recent  times. 

Personal  injuries  are  limited  to  two  cases,  aside  from 
injuries  to  women  and  slaves  already  mentioned  (pp.  57  f.). 
If  an  ox  that  has  heretofore  had  a  good  record  kills  a 
person,  the  ox  is  stoned  but  its  owner  escapes  further 
punishment;  if  the  ox  is  an  old  offender,  the  ox  and 
owner  are  both  slain,  but  the  owner  may  ransom  him¬ 
self  if  he  has  the  means  (21:28-31),  except  in  case  the 
victim  is  a  slave,  when  a  cash  penalty  is  fixed  (see  p.  57). 
The  second  case  concerns  the  man  who  injures  another 
in  a  quarrel  (21:18,  19).  If  the  injury  is  not  fatal  or 


6o 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


permanent,  the  one  who  inflicted  the  injury  must  pay 
his  victim  for  his  loss  of  time  and  provide  for  the  expenses 
of  his  illness.  This  law  presupposes  some  arrangement 
for  compensation  in  cases  of  permanent  injury,  but  no 
specific  provisions  of  this  sort  are  prescribed. 

32.  Social  rights. — We  take  up  now  those  laws  deal¬ 
ing  with  persons  which  are,  so  to  speak,  semi-social. 
These  laws  involve  cases  in  which  society  in  general  is 
directly  or  indirectly  affected  by  the  conduct  of  indi¬ 
viduals  in  a  special  degree.  These  are  chiefly  concerned 
with  the  protection  of  the  poor  and  weak.  The  observ¬ 
ance  of  the  Sabbath  is  three  times  enjoined  (Exod. 
20:8;  23:12;  34:21);  and  though  the  original  implica¬ 
tion  of  the  Sabbath  was  wholly  with  reference  to  pleasing 
the  deity,  its  outcome  was  inevitably  humanitarian,  and 
already  in  our  older  sources  stress  is  laid  upon  that  aspect. 
Keep  the  Sabbath  “that  thine  ox  and  thine  ass  may 
have  rest,  and  the  son  of  thine  handmaid  and  the  stranger 
may  be  refreshed.”  Even  in  the  most  strenuous  times, 
when  slaves  were  liable  to  be  overworked,  viz.,  “in  plow¬ 
ing  time  and  in  harvest,  thou  shalt  rest.”  This  same 
interest  in  the  “stranger”  is  expressed  in  prohibitions  of 
the  oppression  of  “strangers”  (22:21a;  23:9).  The 

“stranger”  was  in  especial  need  of  protection  because, 
coming  into  the  Hebrew  social  order  from  outside,  he  was 
a  member  of  no  powerful  family  or  clan  and  was  liable 
to  harsh  treatment  at  the  hands  of  those  who  thought 
they  might  abuse  him  with  impunity.1  Care  for  the 
interests  of  the  poor  is  evinced  by  special  laws.  No 
interest  might  be  charged  upon  money  loaned  to  a  poor 

1  Another  set  of  motives  may  also  have  operated  to  the  benefit  of 
strangers.  Cf.  p.  45,  n.  1. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


61 


Hebrew;  and  if  his  garment  were  taken  as  security  for 
the  loan  it  must  be  returned  to  him  at  nightfall,  lest  he 
be  without  proper  covering  while  he  tries  to  sleep  (Exod. 
22:25-27).  The  products  of  that  portion  of  the  land 
which  becomes  fallow  every  year  must  be  left  for  the 
sustenance  of  the  poor,  and  this  includes  the  vineyard 
and  the  olive  plantation.  (23:10,  11).  The  poor  man  is 
entitled  to  a  just  judgment  when  he  appears  in  court 
(23 : 6) ;  but  on  the  other  hand  sympathy  for  the  poor 
must  not  prejudice  either  witness  or  judge  in  their  favor 

(23:3)- 

The  importance  and  necessity  of  a  fair  administra¬ 
tion  of  justice  is  recognized  in  a  group  of  laws.  False 
witness  is  forbidden  (20:16).  Collusion  with  wicked 
witnesses  is  prohibited  (23:1).  Yielding  to  the  might 
of  public  opinion  and  joining  the  majority  in  violating 
one’s  own  knowledge  of  what  is  right,  so  that  judgment 
is  perverted,  is  denounced  (23 : 2).  The  citizen  is  bidden 
to  shun  all  falseness  and  so  to  avoid  slaying  the  innocent 
and  righteous  (23:7);  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  or 
bribes  is  warned  against  on  the  ground  that  one  under 
such  obligation  cannot  see  straight  nor  speak  truly  (23 : 8). 
The  spreading  of  false  or  groundless  reports  either  by 
originating  them  or  by  passing  them  along  comes  under 
legal  condemnation  (20 : 16 ;  23:1). 

33.  Moral  insight. — There  remain  three  laws  that 
are  very  penetrating  in  their  insight  into  character  and 
motive.  If  a  man  meets  his  enemy’s  ox  or  ass  going 
astray,  he  is  bidden  to  return  the  stray  animal  to  its 
owner  (23:4).  If  a  man  sees  his  foe’s  ass  fallen  under  a 
load,  he  must  turn  in  and  help  his  neighbor  raise  the 
fallen  animal  (23:5).  This  is  making  heavy  draughts 


6  2 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


upon  the  good  nature  of  the  ordinary  Hebrew.  Finally, 
the  Decalogue  comes  to  a  climax  with  its  embargo  upon 
coveting  (20:17). 

This  tenth  commandment  is  commonly  made  much  of 
by  those  who  would  postpone  the  origin  of  the  Decalogue 
to  the  seventh  century  and  make  it  a  summary  based 
upon  the  teaching  of  the  great  prophets.  As  the  Deca¬ 
logue  now  stands  in  our  Hebrew  and  English  Bibles,  that 
date  is  none  too  late  for  its  appearance.  But  in  its 
original  form  as  the  “ten  words”1  there  is  no  need  of 
deferring  its  composition  to  so  late  a  period.  The  moral 
precepts  for  the  most  part  are  of  that  simple,  elementary 
type  without  the  practice  of  which  no  human  society, 
large  or  small,  can  continue.  Most  of  these  precepts 
are  already  involved  in  the  legislation  of  the  Covenant 
Code  and  worked  out  in  more  detail  there.  It  is  com¬ 
monly  urged  against  the  tenth  “word”  that  it  deals  not 
with  acts  but  with  motives,  and  that  subjective  legisla- 


1  These  “ten  words”  have  been  greatly  expanded  by  later  editors. 
The  nature  of  that  expansion  may  be  seen  by  comparing  the  recension 
in  Exod.,  chap.  20  with  that  in  Deut.,  chap.  5.  Originally  the  decalogue 
consisted  of  ten  brief  lapidary  sentences,  to  which  the  title  “phrases”  or 
“words”  would  fittingly  apply,  the  Hebrew  being  much  more  concise 
than  the  English  rendering.  Reduced  to  their  original  form,  the  “ten 
words”  were  as  follows: 

(1)  Thou  shalt  have  no  other  gods  beside  me. 

(2)  Thou  shalt  not  make  for  thee  a  graven  image. 

(3)  Thou  shalt  not  utter  the  name  of  Yahweh  for  an  evil  purpose. 

(4)  Remember  the  Sabbath  to  sanctify  it. 

(5)  Honor  thy  father  and  thy  mother. 

(6)  Thou  shalt  do  no  murder. 

(7)  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery. 

(8)  Thou  shalt  not  steal. 

(9)  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness  against  thy  neighbor. 

(10)  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor’s  house. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


63 


tion  of  this  sort  is  not  to  be  looked  for  prior  to  the  pres¬ 
entation  of  the  moral  ideals  of  the  prophets.  But  as 
we  have  just  seen,  the  legislation  of  the  Covenant  Code 
does  not  confine  itself  to  objective  acts.  Indeed,  it  is 
rather  noticeable  that  it  goes  beyond  and  behind  the 
act  itself  in  several  instances,  and  takes  account  of  the 
motive  involved.  This  is  seen,  for  example,  in  the  dis¬ 
crimination  between  murder  and  accidental  homicide 
(see  p.  59) ;  in  the  remitting  of  interest  to  the  poor  and 
the  return  of  his  pledged  garment  (see  pp.  60  f.) ;  in  the 
caution  not  to  favor  the  poor  in  a  legal  trial  (see  p.  61); 
in  the  warning  not  to  be  overborne  by  public  opinion 
(see  p.  61) ;  and  in  particular  in  the  two  laws  just  quoted 
with  reference  to  helping  an  enemy  (see  p.  61).  The 
prohibition  of  coveting  is  certainly  no  more  searching 
test  of  character  than  these.  We  may,  therefore,  with 
fair  warrant  make  the  ethical  precepts  of  the  Decalogue 
as  old  as  the  Covenant  Code  legislation  and  use  it  legiti¬ 
mately  as  a  source  of  information  for  the  ethical  standards 
of  the  pre-prophetic  period. 

34.  Kenite  hypothesis. — -In  this  connection  a  few 
words  may  be  said  upon  the  explanation  of  Hebrew 
moral  development  offered  by  the  advocates  of  the 
Kenite  hypothesis  of  the  origin  of  the  religion  of  Yahweh.1 
Briefly  stated,  this  theory  holds  that  the  Israelites  did 
not  know  Yahweh  until  they  learned  of  him  through 
Moses,  who  had  become  his  worshiper  while  staying 
with  his  father-in-law,  Jethro,  the  Kenite.  He  had  gone 

1  For  a  full  exposition  of  this  theory,  see  Karl  Budde,  Religion  of 
Israel  to  the  Exile  (1899),  PP-  1-38;  cf.  Geo.  A.  Barton,  A  Sketch  of 
Semitic  Origins,  chap,  vii;  H.  P.  Smith,  The  Religion  of  Israel ,  pp.  50  ff.; 
and  L.  B.  Paton,  “The  Origin  of  Yahweh- Worship  in  Israel,”  Biblical 
World,  XXVIII  (1906),  113-27. 


64 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


back  to  Egypt  and  in  the  name  of  Yahweh  had  sum¬ 
moned  the  enslaved  Hebrews  to  follow  him  out  of  Egypt. 
After  the  crossing  of  the  Red  Sea,  Moses  had  led  Israel 
to  Sinai  where  Jethro,  priest  of  Yahweh,  had  welcomed 
them  into  the  ranks  of  Yah  well- worshipers  and  given 
them  the  right  hand  of  fellowship.  This  theory  is 
furthermore  developed  by  Budde  in  such  a  way  as  to 
make  it  furnish  the  cause  and  explanation  of  the  wonder¬ 
ful  moral  superiority  of  Israel’s  religion  over  that  of  all 
other  Semites,  including  the  Kenites  themselves.  In 
Budde’s  own  words  the  case  is  thus  stated: 

Thus  all  attempts  to  find  the  germ  of  the  ethical  development 
of  the  Yahweh-religion  in  the  material  content  of  the  conception 
of  God  as  represented  by  Moses  have  completely  failed.  Let  us 
now  enquire  whether  by  asking  the  question  “How?”  instead  of 
“What?”  we  cannot  reach  a  better  result.  How  did  Israel  come 
to  its  religion  ?  It  went  over,  at  Sinai,  to  a  rude  nomad  religion, 
a  religion  which  did  not  stand  higher  than  that  of  other  tribes  at 
the  same  stage  of  civilisation.  It  served  henceforth  the  same 
God  as  the  tribe  of  the  Kenites  to  which  Moses’  wife  belonged. 
But  the  Latin  proverb  rightly  says,  “When  two  do  the  same 
thing  it  is  not  the  same.”  For  one  fundamental  difference  existed 
between  Israel  and  the  Kenites  from  the  beginning.  The  latter, 
like  numberless  other  tribes  and  peoples,  had  had  their  god  from 
time  immemorial.  But  Israel  had  turned  to  Him  of  its  own  free 
will,  and  chosen  Him  as  its  God.  The  Kenites  served  their  god 
because  they  knew  no  better;  because  he  was  of  their  blood- 
kindred,  and  had  grown  up  in  inseparable  union  with  them; 
because  his  worship  belonged  to  the  necessary  and  almost  uncon¬ 
scious  expression  of  the  life  of  the  people.  This  was  still  the  case 
with  their  remote  descendants,  the  Rechabites  of  the  time  of 
Jeremiah.  But  Israel  served  Yahweh  because  He  had  kept  His 
word;  because  He  had  won  Israel  as  His  possession  by  an  inesti¬ 
mable  benefit;  because  it  owed  Him  gratitude  and  fidelity  in 
return  for  this  boon,  and  could  ensure  its  further  prosperity  only 
by  evidences  of  such  fidelity. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


65 


Thus,  in  the  very  transition  to  this  new  religion,  virtues  were 
both  awakened  in  the  heart  of  the  people  and  maintained  in  con¬ 
tinuous  watchfulness.  If  Yahweh-worship  itself  had  no  ethical 
character,  this  relation  to  Him  had  such  character,  and  all  future 
development  could  spring  therefrom. 

This  explanation  of  Budde’s  gave  the  Kenite  hypothe¬ 
sis  a  new  lease  of  life.  It  seemed  to  solve  one  of  the 
most  difficult  problems  in  the  study  of  Hebrew  religion 
in  comparison  with  other  religions;  and  it  was  accepted 
far  and  wide  without  further  question.  But  time  has 
given  opportunity  for  reflection  and  the  assent  to  this 
theory  is  not  so  unanimous  today  as  twenty  years  ago.1 
We  are  here  concerned  only  with  the  ethical  phase  of 
the  hypothesis;  and  from  that  point  of  view  two  serious 
objections  to  its  validity  must  be  reckoned  with.  The 
first  of  these  comes  from  a  survey  of  the  history  of 
religions  for  the  discovery  of  parallel  cases.  Clans, 
tribes,  and  peoples  have  changed  their  gods,  voluntarily 
and  involuntarily,  times  without  number  in  the  history 
of  man.  Nowhere  else  in  the  world  has  such  a  change 
of  gods  ever  brought  about,  in  and  of  itself,  such  strik¬ 
ing  moral  superiority  to  other  peoples  as  did  the  accept¬ 
ance  of  Yahweh  according  to  the  Kenite  hypothe¬ 
sis.  For  example,  the  Western  Semites  who  entered 
Babylonia  in  early  times  accepted  the  culture  and 
religion  of  the  Babylonian  plains  without  any  such 
astonishing  after-effect  as  is  here  presupposed.  In  like 
manner,  the  Kassites  came  down  into  the  same  region 
and  were  absorbed  into  the  new  life  and  culture  and  left 
no  marked  moral  impress  upon  that  life.  When  the 
Hebrews  were  deported  from  Samaria,  they  were  them- 

1  Cf.  J.  P.  Peters,  The  Religion  of  Israel ,  pp.  80  ff.;  A.  Knudson, 
The  Religious  Teaching  of  the  Old  Testament ,  pp.  157  ff. 


66 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


selves  merged  in  the  Assyrian  population  and  accepted 
its  religion  and  disappeared  from  history.  Their  place 
was  taken  in  Samaria  by  certain  Arab  clans,  who  found 
it  advisable  to  learn  the  religion  of  the  land,  and  no  great 
illumination  or  moral  uplift  is  on  record  with  regard  to 
them.  Still  further,  Syria  has  been  “  a  land  flowing  with 
milk  and  honey”  to  the  eyes  of  many  nomadic  clans. 
Again  and  again  they  have  pressed  in  from  the  desert 
and  made  for  themselves  a  place  among  the  settled 
population  of  Syria.  They  have  brought  their  native 
gods  with  them  and  have  served  them  alongside  of  the 
gods  of  the  land  and  have  finally  accepted  the  religion 
of  the  land  outright.  Yet  we  have  no  single  record  of 
any  great  moral  progress  resulting  from  such  exchange 
of  gods.1  Consequently,  from  this  point  of  view,  the 
Kenite  hypothesis  offers  an  explanation  that  is  itself 
inexplicable.  The  second  objection  to  this  explanation 
is  that  it  is  too  simple.  It  traces  the  ethical  splendor  of 
Israel  back  to  one  single  cause,  viz.,  the  act  of  voluntary 
choice  in  the  adoption  of  Yahweh  by  the  Hebrew  clans 
at  Sinai.  We  might  almost  as  reasonably  attempt  to 
ascribe  the  origin  of  the  ocean  to  a  single  stream.  The 
ethical  life  of  a  people  is  a  thing  of  complex  and  composite 
character.  It  is  fed  by  many  streams.  Each  individual 
and  every  social  group  makes  its  contribution.  Eco¬ 
nomic,  political,  social,  and  religious  forces  all  combine 
and  are  inextricably  interwoven  in  the  production  of 
ethics.  It  is  therefore  extremely  hazardous  to  pick  out 
any  one  single  act  in  a  people’s  history  and  hold  it  respon¬ 
sible  for  all  the  later  moral  progress.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  moral  life  of  pre-prophetic  Israel,  as  we  have 

1  See  R.  Dussaud,  Les  Arabes  en  Syrie  avant  I'Islam  (1907),  pp.  1-23. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


67 


surveyed  it  in  chapters  i  and  ii,  does  not  present  any¬ 
thing  that  would  warrant  us  in  bestowing  any  prize 
for  moral  excellence  upon  the  Hebrew  people  of  that 
age  as  compared  with  any  other  people  in  a  similar  stage 
of  progress  in  the  upward  course  toward  full  civilization. 
The  glory  of  Hebrew  life  was  a  thing  yet  to  be  revealed 
and  is  inexplicable  apart  from  the  great  prophets. 

If  the  Hebrew  tradition  regarding  the  proceedings  at 
Sinai-Kadesh  have  any  solid  foundation,  the  situation 
was  such  as  to  give  a  moral  impetus  to  the  clans  there 
present.  The  Hebrew  clans  that  came  out  of  Egypt 
there  joined  the  Kenites,  Kenizzites,  Calebites,  and  other 
clans  dwelling  in  the  Negeb  and  formed  a  political  and 
religious  federation  with  them.  Whatever  legislation 
was  adopted  there  was,  of  course,  not  new  but  rather  a 
revision  of  previously  existing  laws  and  customs.  But 
more  than  that,  it  was  also  an  expansion  of  the  sphere 
of  operation  for  those  laws  and  customs.  Whereas 
before  the  federation  each  clan  had  observed  certain 
principles  of  practice  with  reference  to  its  own  members, 
after  the  federation  these  same  rules  and  customs  became 
obligatory  for  all  the  members  of  the  participating  clans. 
This  expansion  of  the  area  within  which  moral  obliga¬ 
tions  operated  meant  much  for  moral  progress.  The 
moral  principles  that  were  embodied  in  the  terms  of  the 
federation  were,  of  course,  simple  and  elementary  and 
probably  only  such  as  were  in  force  among  all  nomadic 
societies  of  the  time  and  region,  but  the  inclusion  within 
the  area  of  their  enforcement  of  a  large  number  of 
members  of  various  clans,  heretofore  lying  outside  of 
that  area,  was  a  fact  of  no  small  importance  morally.1 

1  Cf.  C.  H.  Cooley,  Social  Organization  (1909),  chap,  xi,  “The  Enlarge¬ 
ment  of  Consciousness.” 


68 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


It  would  not  be  wise  to  trace  all  the  later  moral  progress 
of  the  Hebrews  back  to  this  source,  after  the  manner  of 
the  advocates  of  the  Kenite  hypothesis;  but  this  fact 
must  be  included  among  the  causes  of  the  moral  and 
religious  leadership  of  Israel,  the  sources  of  which  seem 
to  have  lain  to  so  large  an  extent  to  the  south  and  south¬ 
west  of  ancient  Palestine.1 

35.  Leading  virtues. — For  the  sake  of  convenience, 
we  shall  now  summarize  the  principal  virtues  emphasized 
in  the  literature  of  this  pre-prophetic  period.  This  will 
enable  us  to  realize  the  main  things  that  commended 
themselves  to  the  social  mind  of  that  age. 

The  center  of  interest  was  not  the  individual,  but 
the  group  to  which  he  belonged.  The  social  life  and 
welfare  took  precedence  of  the  individual’s  interests. 
The  individual  lived  primarily  not  for  himself,  but  for 
his  family,  clan,  or  tribe.  Not  that  the  individual  was 
himself  conscious  of  such  an  unselfish  aim  or  purpose, 
but  the  community  at  large  thought  of  its  individual 
members  from  that  point  of  view.  The  individual  was 
valued  in  terms  of  what  he  was  worth  to  his  group  and 
how  he  could  be  useful  in  its  service.  Individuals  from 
other  groups,  who  had  forsaken  their  own  kin  and  were 
seeking  the  protection  of  a  Hebrew  family  or  clan,  were 
welcomed  into  the  new  fellowship  and  were  protected 

1  See  J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  “Southern  Influences  upon  Hebrew 
Prophecy,”  American  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages  and  Literatures, 
XXXV  (1918),  1-19;  cf.  idem,  “Some  Problems  in  the  Early  History 
of  Hebrew  Religion,”  ibid.,  XXXII  (1916),  81-97;  D.  D.  Luckenbill, 
“On  Israel’s  Origins,”  American  Journal  of  Theology,  XXII  (1918), 
24-53;  T.  J.  Meek,  “A  Proposed  Reconstruction  of  Early  Hebrew 
History,”  ibid.,  XXIV  (1920),  209-16;  idem,  “Some  Religious  Origins 
of  the  Hebrews,”  American  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages  and  Litera¬ 
tures ,  XXXVIIfi(i92i),  101-31. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EARLY  CODES 


69 


in  their  elemental  rights  by  the  common  consent  of  the 
clan.  Laws  and  customs  protecting  such  “ strangers” 
and  “ guests”  form  a  prominent  element  in  the  social 
order.  But  foreigners  had  no  claims  upon  Hebrews. 
Anything  that  was  practicable  and  safe  might  be  done 
to  them  apparently.  The  only  consideration  protecting 
a  foreigner  or  a  foreign  group  was  the  question  as  to 
whether  or  not  there  were  powerful  allies  or  friends  either 
spiritual  or  earthly  who  were  in  a  position  to  avenge 
wrongs  done  to  a  foreigner  by  the  Hebrews.  This  same 
social  bond  appears  in  the  institution  of  blood-revenge, 
which  was  in  good  and  regular  standing.  A  beginning 
of  discrimination  in  the  practice  of  the  rite  is  seen  in  the 
recognition  of  certain  places  as  asylums  whither  the 
accidental  man-killer  might  flee  for  safety,  if  he  could 
arrive  there  without  being  intercepted  by  the  blood- 
avenger. 

Polygamy  was  in  good  repute.  The  more  wives  the 
better,  provided  they  were  good  ones.  Women  were  to 
a  large  extent  not  persons,  but  things  to  be  bought  and 
sold.  Yet  there  was  room  for  deep  family  affection  and 
for  genuine  personal  love.  Religion  was  no  respecter 
of  sex.  At  least,  the  prophetic  function  could  be  exer¬ 
cised  as  well  by  a  woman  as  by  a  man. 

Slavery  of  foreigners  and  even  of  fellow-Hebrews  was 
a  recognized  part  of  the  social  fabric.  It  was  modified 
for  the  Hebrew  slave  by  a  requirement  that  he  be  released 
at  the  end  of  six  years’  labor.  And  further  care  for  him 
was  exercised  in  that  his  master  was  penalized  for  cruel 
and  unusual  treatment  of  him.  In  similar  fashion,  the 
poor  were  provided  for  to  a  limited  extent.  They  were 
protected  by  law  against  grasping  and  exorbitant  cred- 


70 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


itors  and  a  certain  amount  of  unstable  charity  was  pro¬ 
vided  for  them. 

The  elements  in  personal  character  that  meet  with 
approval  and  commendation  are  simple  and  fundamental. 
Among  a  people  compelled  to  fight  for  the  right  to  exist, 
bravery  was  in  high  esteem.  A  certain  largeness  of  mind 
or  generosity  is  also  predicated  of  the  best  men.  The 
quality  of  gratitude  for  favors  received  and  service 
rendered  was  also  greatly  appreciated.  Honesty,  integ¬ 
rity,  and  justice  are  indispensable  elements  of  true 
manhood.  The  loyalty  of  true  friendship  also  captured 
the  imagination  and  made  a  profound  impression.  The 
virtues  of  the  second  table  of  the  Decalogue  represent 
the  generally  accepted  standards  of  personal  life  for  the 
period.  These  comprise  reverence  for  parents,  regard 
for  the  value  of  human  life,  solicitude  for  the  purity  of 
family  life,  respect  for  property  rights,  rigid  adherence 
to  the  truth  and  nothing  but  the  truth  in  matters  of 
law,  and  a  proper  control  of  the  inner  life  such  as  shall 
prevent  covetousness.  Such  virtues  as  these  lie  at  the 
foundation  of  all  moral  order.  The  observance  of  these 
laws  and  the  living  of  the  proper  social  life,  together 
with  its  religious  obligations,  were  thought  to  insure  pros¬ 
perity  and  success,  whether  for  individual  or  group. 


PART  II 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PROPHETIC  PERIOD 


CHAPTER  IV 


THE  PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 

36.  The  times  of  Amos. — The  eighth  century  in  Israel 
stands  out  from  all  the  centuries  by  reason  of  the  fact 
that  it  produced  four  great  Hebrew  prophets,  Amos, 
Hosea,  Isaiah,  and  Micah.  The  appearance  of  these 
men  marked  a  new  era  in  the  religious  life  of  Israel  and 
in  the  history  of  mankind.  They  were  idealists  of  the 
first  rank— men  whose  ideals  were  dearer  to  them  than 
life  itself.  They  sought  to  make  these  ideals  effective  in 
the  life  of  their  times  and  insisted  upon  their  supreme 
value  though  their  contemporaries  rejected  them  and 
their  ideals. 

The  first  of  these  prophets  was  Amos,  and  he  struck 
the  keynote  of  all  subsequent  prophecy.  He  called 
Northern  Israel  to  the  bar,  declared  her  guilty,  and 
passed  sentence  of  death  upon  her.  This  judgment  of 
doom  was  not  based  upon  a  study  of  the  movements  of 
armies  in  Western  Asia,  nor  upon  a  shrewd  estimate  of 
the  strength  of  the  various  powers  by  whom  Israel  was 
surrounded.  Amos  began  his  prophetic  career  at  approx¬ 
imately  765  b.c.1  At  that  particular  time  and  for  the 
next  decade  there  was  nothing  on  foot  in  Western  Asia 
or  in  Egypt  that  would  have  warranted  a  prediction  of 
military  conquest  of  Israel  by  any  possible  foe. 

At  the  death  of  Adad-nirari  of  Assyria,  in  783  B.c.,  the  Assyrian 
Empire  entered  upon  a  struggle  for  life.  Between  783  and  773  b.c., 
Shalmaneser  headed  six  campaigns  against  the  kingdom  of  Urartu, 

1  See  W.  R.  Harper,  Amos  and  Hosea  (1905),  pp.  cii  ff. 


73 


74 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


which  lay  to  the  north  of  Assyria,  in  the  region  above  Lake  Van. 
In  the  course  of  this  struggle,  the  foe  on  one  occasion  pressed  down 
to  within  a  few  days’  journey  of  Nineveh.  The  Syrian  states 
farther  west,  who  had  leagued  together  against  Assyria  in  854  b.c. 
and  again  in  849  and  846,  and  had  been  harassed  by  her  armies  in 
almost  each  successive  year  from  843  to  828  b.c.  and  again  from 
806  to  797  b.c.,  were  naturally  vitally  interested  in  the  progress 
of  the  contest  between  Assyria  and  Urartu  and  cast  in  their  lot 
with  Urartu  against  Assyria.  Hence,  after  repelling  Urartu, 
Shalmaneser  pushed  west  in  773  and  attacked  Damascus.  His 
successors,  Ashurdan  and  Ashur-nirari  campaigned  against 
Hadrach  in  central  Syria  in  772  and  765  b.c.  and  defended  Arpad 
against  the  Chaldi  of  Urartu  in  754  b.c.  This  was  the  last  flicker 
of  Assyrian  power  in  the  West  until  the  accession  of  Tiglath-pileser 
in  745  b.c.  These  were  days  of  waning  power  in  Assyria,  and  the 
future  of  the  western  lands  was  by  no  means  clearly  recognizable. 
Would  Assyria  revive  and  reassert  her  old-time  power  ?  Or  would 
the  peoples  of  Urartu  succeed  in  displacing  her  power  by  their 
own?  Amos  did  not  undertake  to  answer  this  question  for  his 
contemporaries.  He  is  content  to  indicate  the  north  as  the 
direction  whence  destruction  is  coming  upon  the  states  of  Syria 
and  Palestine. 

During  this  same  period,  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II,  Israel  was 
enjoying  a  prosperity  that  had  not  been  equalled  since  the  reign 
of  Solomon.  Egypt  was  powerless  to  trouble  her,  the  last  days 
of  the  2 2d  Dynasty  being  marked  by  internal  conflicts  and  schisms 
that  consumed  all  her  energy.  As  a  result  of  the  Assyrian  cam¬ 
paigns  in  the  West,  under  Shalmaneser  (859-825  b.c.)  and  Adad- 
nirari  (812-783  b.c.),  Syria,  the  old  enemy  of  Israel,  who  had 
reduced  her  to  a  pitiable  state  in  the  reigns  of  Jehu  (II  Kings  10:32) 
and  Jehoahaz  (II  Kings  13:7),  had  herself  been  rendered  powerless 
and  incapable  of  further  molesting  her  southern  neighbor.  Jero¬ 
boam  indeed,  following  up  the  successes  of  Joash  (II  Kings  13:25), 
expelled  Damascus  completely  from  the  territory  of  Israel  (II  Kings 
14:25-28).  Judah,  too,  after  Amaziah’s  vain  attempt  to  assert 
independence  from  Joash  (II  Kings  14:8-14),  troubled  Israel  no 
more  and  probably  paid  regular  tribute. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 


75 


Freed  thus  from  external  conflicts,  Israel  was  left  to  recuperate 
from  her  exhausting  wars  with  Syria  and  to  develop  her  own 
internal  resources  in  peace.  The  resulting  prosperity  is  reflected 
in  the  sermons  of  Amos.1 

37.  The  basis  of  the  message  of  Amos. — As  a  matter 
of  fact,  Amos  was  very  vague  in  his  reference  to  the 
agent  or  agency  through  which  disaster  was  to  be  brought 
upon  Israel.  In  several  passages  he  expresses  himself 
in  such  a  way  as  to  show  that  he  is  anticipating  Israel’s 
destruction  at  the  hands  of  an  invading  army,  but  he 
never  definitely  names  the  invader  (see  3:11;  4:2,  3; 
5:27;  6:14;  7:11,  17).  In  other  passages  he  seems  to 
have  looked  for  the  disaster  in  the  form  of  an  earthquake 
or  some  other  natural  catastrophe  (2:14-16;  5:3,  16, 
17;  8:8-14;  9:1-4).  The  thing  of  which  he  is  certain 
and  about  which  he  is  specific  is  his  conviction  that 
Israel  must  fall,  and  that  at  the  hands  of  her  own  God. 
The  basis  of  his  certainty,  therefore,  was  not  found  in 
any  external  support,  but  lay  rather  within  himself.  It 
was  a  conviction  that  possessed  his  soul,  an  ineradicable 
assurance  that  needed  no  external  support.  As  a  matter 
of  fact  the  nation  of  Northern  Israel  was  more  prosperous 
and  powerful  in  the  days  of  Amos  than  it  had  ever  been 
since  it  became  a  separate  kingdom  (II  Kings  14:25-28). 
Downfall  and  destruction  were  far  from  the  minds  of 
the  masses  in  Jeroboam’s  day.  Never  had  wealth  and 
luxury  been  more  common.  None  but  a  prophet  could 
see  the  signs  of  decay  and  dare  to  utter  a  warning  cry. 

38.  The  Day  of  Yahweh. — Amos  found  current  among 
his  contemporaries  a  popular  expectation  of  an  approach- 

1  See  J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  Amos,  Ho  sea,  and  Micah  (Bible  for  Home 
and  School)  (1914),  pp.  5,  6. 


76 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ing  Day  of  Yahweh.  This  Day  was  to  usher  in  a  period 
of  glory  for  Israel  as  the  chosen  people  of  Yahweh.  It 
was  to  be  the  beginning  of  a  Golden  Age,  the  restoration 
of  the  primeval  Paradise.  The  enemies  of  Israel  and 
of  Yahweh  were  to  be  overthrown  and  Israel  was  to 
reign  supreme  among  the  nations  of  the  earth.  Pros¬ 
perity  was  to  abound  on  every  hand  and  life  be  one 
continuous  song.  Amos  laid  hold  of  this  popular  con¬ 
viction  and  made  use  of  it  for  the  purpose  of  his  own 
message.  He  transformed  the  Day  of  Yahweh  from  a 
day  of  triumph  into  a  day  of  doom. 

Woe  unto  you  who  are  longing  for  the  Day  of  Yahweh! 

For  what  end  is  your  Day  of  Yahweh  ? 

It  is  darkness  and  not  light. 

Even  as  when  a  man  flees  from  before  a  lion, 

And  a  bear  meets  him, 

Or  he  enters  a  house  and  lays  his  hand  upon  the  wall, 

And  a  serpent  bites  him. 

Will  not  the  Day  of  Yahweh  be  darkness  and  not  light, 

Even  dense  darkness  and  no  brightness  in  it 
[Amos  5:18-20]? 

This  was  a  complete  reversal  of  the  popular  conception 
of  the  Day  of  Yahweh.  Instead  of  victory  it  would  spell 
disaster.  The  prophet  made  use  of  his  Day  of  Yahweh 
to  frighten  his  people  and  turn  them  from  the  error  of 
their  ways,  much  as  old-time  evangelists  preached  hell 
to  trembling  sinners.  Amos  thus  took  hold  of  an  ancient 
idea  with  no  moral  content  and  ethicized  it,  made  it 
Serve  as  reinforcement  of  his  own  moral  passion.  But 
this  regeneration  of  the  idea  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  was 
only  one  element  in  his  greater  endeavor  to  ethicize  the 
whole  popular  religion  of  his  day.  Amos  is  quite  com¬ 
monly  called  the  “ Creator  of  Ethical  Monotheism.’’ 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 


77 


This  title  is,  perhaps,  a  bit  too  grandiose;  but  in  any 
case,  the  work  of  Amos  marked  a  great  step  forward  in 
the  development  of  ethical  monotheism. 

39.  Popular  religion. — To  understand  the  significance 
of  this  term,  ethical  monotheism,  we  must  see  what  it 
was  that  it  was  called  upon  to  displace.  The  popular 
religion  of  the  times  of  Amos  held  to  Yahweh  as  one 
among  many  national  gods,  albeit  the  mightiest  of  them 
all.  He  could  be  counted  upon  to  take  his  people’s  part 
against  any  and  every  foe,  provided  that  his  nation 
complied  with  his  requirements.  That  he  could  or  would 
abandon  his  people  and  leave  them  to  the  mercy  of  their 
foes,  even  though  this  might  mean  their  destruction, 
was  almost  inconceivable  to  them.  That  he  should  go 
farther  and  himself  bring  about  their  destruction,  was 
quite  beyond  the  range  of  their  imagination.  This  is 
explicitly  stated  by  Micah  as  being  the  point  of  view  of 
his  contemporaries  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eighth 
century.  They  say  to  him: 

Do  not  keep  on  prophesying  such  things. 

Shame  cannot  overtake  the  house  of  Jacob. 

Is  the  spirit  of  Yahweh  straitened  ? 

Are  such  his  doings  ? 

Do  not  his  words  mean  good  to  Israel  [Mic.  2:6,  7]  ?r 
And  again: 

Yet  do  they  lean  upon  Yahweh  and  say, 

“Is  not  Yahweh  in  the  midst  of  us? 

No  disaster  can  befall  us”  [Mic.  3:11]. 

40.  The  message  of  Amos. — Amos  attacked  this  posi¬ 
tion  along  two  lines.  First,  he  declared  that  Yahweh’s 

1  For  corrections  of  the  text  involved  in  this  translation,  see  J.  M. 
Powis  Smith,  Micah  {International  Critical  Commentary ,  in  loc.). 


78 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


interests  were  not  confined  to  Israel  and  Judah.  His 
oracles  against  Damascus  (1:3-5),  Philistia  (1:6-8), 
Ammon  (1:13-15),  and  Moab  (2.-I-3)1  presuppose 
Yahweh’s  interest  in,  and  power  over,  those  nations. 
It  may  be  noticed  also  that  they  are  denounced  not 
solely  for  wrongs  done  to  Israel,  which  would  be  quite 
consistent  with  the  conception  of  Yahweh  as  a  purely 
national  God,  but  for  violations  of  great  human  con¬ 
siderations  which,  particularly  in  the  case  of  Philistia 
and  more  especially  Ammon,  have  no  apparent  or 
immediate  bearing  upon  Israel’s  interests.  Besides 
that,  the  offenses  of  the  nations  denounced  are  not 
primarily  theological;  it  is  not  that  they  worship  other 
gods  than  Yahweh,  but  rather  that  they  violate  the 
commonly  accepted  rules  of  decency  as  applied  to  one 
nation’s  treatment  of  another.  They  set  at  naught  the 
common  human  rights.  But  going  still  farther  than 
that,  Amos  ventures  to  declare  that  Israel  has  no  special 
claim  on  the  favor  of  Yahweh.  If  she  has  been  given 
privileges,  they  have  but  increased  her  responsibilities 
proportionately  (Amos  3:2).  Not  only  so,  but  the 
very  favors  of  which  she  constantly  boasts,  have  they 
not  in  equal  measure  been  bestowed  upon  other  nations, 
even  upon  peoples  that  have  been  fiercely  hostile  to 
Israel  ? 

Are  you  not  as  the  children  of  the  Ethiopians  unto  me, 

O  house  of  Israel  ?  says  Yahweh. 

Did  I  not  bring  up  Israel  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 

And  the  Philistines  from  Caphtor,  and  the  Syrians  from 
Kir  [Amos  9:7]? 

1  The  oracles  against  Tyre  and  Edom  are  of  later  origin.  See  W.  R. 
Harper,  Amos  and  Ho  sea,  in  loc. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 


79 


Amos  thus  sweeps  away  Israel’s  special  privilege  at  a 
stroke.  Yahweh  is  God  of  the  nations  and  treats  all 
according  as  he  wills  and  they  deserve.  Amos’s  second 
line  of  attack  upon  the  popular  position  was  directed  y 
against  the  common  view  that  Yahweh  was  under 
obligation  to  help  Israel  because  she  had  been  loyal  to 
him  in  the  doing  of  his  will.  Amos  apparently  had 
no  quarrel  with  the  general  principle  involved  in  this. 
For  him,  as  for  the  people,  piety  might  be  expected  to 
yield  prosperity.  But  he  demanded  a  different  type  of 
piety.  He  emphasized  different  elements  in  religion  from 
those  stressed  by  the  mass  of  his  contemporaries.  He 
enthroned  ethics  in  the  supreme  place  in  religion;  they 
divided  the  honors  between  ethics  and  ritual,  with  the 
greater  emphasis,  perhaps,  on  ritual. 

41.  Character  vs.  ritual. — It  will  hardly  do  to  make 
Amos  wholly  discard  ritual  and  put  ethics  in  its  place, 
as  some  interpreters  would  have  us  do.1  Certainly,  some 
of  his  statements  in  and  of  themselves  might  be  so 
interpreted,  for  example: 

Come  to  Bethel,  and  transgress; 

To  Gilgal,  and  multiply  transgression ! 

And  bring  your  sacrifices  every  morning, 

And  your  tithes  every  three  days ! 

And  offer  a  sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  of  that  which  is 
leavened, 

And  proclaim  free-will  offerings  and  publish  them: 

For  this  pleases  you,  O  ye  children  of  Israel  [Amos  4 : 4  f.]. 

And  again: 

I  hate,  I  despise  your  feasts, 

And  I  take  no  delight  in  your  solemn  assemblies. 

1  See  W.  R.  Harper,  Amos  and  Hosea  (1905),  pp.  cxixf. 


8o 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Yea,  though  ye  offer  me  your  burnt  offerings  and  meal 
offerings,  I  will  not  accept  them; 

Neither  will  I  regard  the  peace  offerings  of  your  fat  beasts. 
Take  away  from  me  the  noise  of  thy  songs; 

For  I  will  not  hear  the  melody  of  thy  viols. 

But  let  judgment  roll  down  as  waters, 

And  righteousness  as  a  perennial  stream. 

Was  it  sacrifices  and  offerings  that  ye  brought  unto  me 
Forty  years  in  the  wilderness,  O  house  of  Israel 
[Amos  5:21-25]  ? 

In  determining  the  significance  of  such  statements,  they 
must  be  considered  in  the  light  of  certain  facts.  Ancient 
Semitic  religions  were  made  up  very  largely  of  ritual; 
and  Hebrew  religion  was  no  exception  to  this  general 
rule.  A  religion  without  ritual  would  have  been  practi¬ 
cally  inconceivable  to  the  Hebrew  mind,  and  the 
prophets  never  ceased  to  be  Hebrews.  The  idealistic 
character  of  the  prophet  must  also  be  reckoned  with. 
Amos  was  intent  upon  making  his  point  and  he  spared 
no  language  in  accomplishing  his  purpose.  He  painted 
conditions  at  their  darkest  and  he  stated  his  own  ideals 
and  standards  at  their  strongest.  His  language  must 
always  be  taken  with  allowance  for  the  exaggeration 
characteristic  of  a  man  who  is  in  dead  earnest  and  con¬ 
vinced  that  he  is  pointing  out  the  only  way  of  deliverance. 
Other  prophets,  like  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  use  equally 
strong  language  in  reference  to  ritual,  and  yet  the  records 
of  their  work  clearly  show  that  they  themselves  made  a 
certain  place  for  ritual.1  Indeed  the  utterances  of  Amos 
himself  are  not  wholly  without  indications  that  he  was 
not  consistently  hostile  to  ritual.  He  refers  to  the  local 
shrines,  the  Nazirites,  the  institution  of  clean  and 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 


81 


unclean,  the  new  moon  and  the  Sabbath  at  times  (2:8, 
11,12;  7:17;  8:5)  without  any  indication  of  disapproval. 
It  is  safer,  therefore,  to  assume  that  Amos  is  protesting 
not  against  ritual  per  se,  but  against  making  ritual  do 
service  for  character  and  right  conduct. 

42.  Righteousness  and  justice. — Amos  was  pre¬ 
eminently  a  preacher  of  righteousness  and  justice. 
He  might  well  be  called  the  protagonist  of  the  poor. 
His  message  is  couched  for  the  most  part  in  the  language 
of  denunciation  of  the  rich  and  powerful.  His  own 
ideals  are  largely  to  be  inferred  as  the  contrary  of  the 
things  he  denounces.  It  is  noteworthy  that  much  of 
what  he  decries  had,  in  principle  at  least,  and  often  in 
specific  precept,  been  prohibited  or  warned  against  in 
the  Covenant  Code  (see  above,  chap,  iii,  pp.  49-70).  He 
charges  the  capitalists  of  his  day  with  selling  good  men 
into  slavery  for  lack  of  ability  to  pay  a  trifling  debt 
(2:6;  8:6;  cf.  Exod.  21 130;  22:21,24).  They  “ buffet 
the  heads  of  the  poor”  (2:7);  and  “ trample”  them  into 
the  dust  (5:11).  They  violate  the  law  of  the  land 
(Exod.  22:25k)  by  keeping  the  poor  man’s  garment 
overnight  when  taken  as  security  for  a  loan  (2:8). 
They  get  the  poor  into  their  power  in  various  and  nefari¬ 
ous  ways.  They  sell  him  poor  grain  (8:6),  they  “take 
exactions  of  wheat”  from  him,  whatever  that  may  mean 
(5:11),  and  they  cheat  him  with  false  weights  and 
measures  (8:5).  They  bribe  their  judges  (5:12),  so 
that  judgment  is  turned  to  wormwood  and  justice  is 
set  at  naught  (5:7;  6:3,  12).  Even  the  women  are 
so  far  gone  in  their  craze  for  luxury  that  they  urge  their 
husbands  on  in  their  evil  course  of  oppression  (4:1,  2), 
to  the  end  that  they  may  have  wherewith  to  indulge 


8  2 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


themselves  to  the  utmost  in  sensuous  pleasures.  The 
cause  of  the  poor  is  so  unpopular  that  no  shrewd  man 
will  lift  up  his  voice  in  their  behalf  (5:10,  13).  Oppres¬ 
sion  and  violence  are  abroad  in  the  land  (3:9,  10;  6:3) 
and  such  methods  are  so  prevalent  that  there  is  no  chance 
for  the  poor  man: 

Hear  this,  O  ye  that  trample  upon  the  needy, 

And  cause  the  poor  of  the  land  to  cease  [8:4]. 

All  this  was  in  direct  yiolation  of  the  spirit  and  letter 
of  the  Covenant  Code,  the  recognized  law  of  the  land 
(Exod.  22:21-27;  23:1,  2,  6-9,  12). 

Drunkenness  was  common  (Amos  2:8,  12;  4:1)  and 
a  certain  amount  of  sexual  license  (Amos  2:7;  cf. 
Exod.  21:7  ff.).  The  wealth  so  cruelly  wrung  from  the 
poor  was  expended  in  all  kinds  of  luxury  and  riotous 
living  (Amos  3:12  ff.;  4:1  ff.;  6:1  ff.).  In  the  light  of 
such  conditions,  Amos  charges  his  rich  contemporaries 
with  unpardonable  ignorance  of  the  principles  of  right 
and  wrong. 

They  know  not  how  to  do  right  [3:10]. 

They  are  indifferent  to  the  public  welfare  (6:4-6).  He 

urges  upon  them  a  complete  reversal  of  their  conduct: 

Seek  good,  and  not  evil, That  ye  may  live; 

That  so  Yahweh,  the  God  of  hosts,  may  be  with  you,  as 
ye  say. 

Hate  the  evil  and  love  the  good  and  establish  judgment  in 
the  gate  [5:14,  15]. 

Let  judgment  roll  down  as  waters, 

And  righteousness  as  a  perennial  stream  [5:24]. 

This  is  in  Amos’s  mind  the  sure  path  to  prosperity.  The 
nation  that  heeds  the  requirements  of  Yahweh  must  pros¬ 
per;  piety  and  success  are  inseparable  (cf.  Amos  5:4-7). 


1 


l 

PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY '  83 

43.  Amos's  contribution  to  the  ethical  progress  of 
Israel  was  of  two  kinds.  First,  he  made  ethics  the 
supreme  concern  of  religion,  th e-sine  qua  non  of  the  divine 
favor.  Secondly,  he  broadened  the  sphere  of  operation 
for  Hebrew  ethics.  He  made  it  clear  that  the  moral 
obligations  binding  upon  the  Hebrews  were,  at  least  in 
certain  special  cases,  obligatory  likewise  upon  non- 
Hebraic  nations  such  as  Syria,  Philistia,  Moab,  and 
Ammon.  These  would  meet  their  doom  not  because 
they  were  non-Hebrew  and  non- Yah wis tic,  but  because 
they  were  non-moral,  or  rather,  immoral.  In  his  stand¬ 
ards  for  his  own  people,  he  seems  not  to  have  gone  far, 
if  at  all,  beyond  the  Covenant  Code.  There  is  nothing 
in  principle  new  in  the  moral  precepts  of  Amos.  He 
never  implies  in  the  slightest  degree  that  he  is  preaching 
a  new  moral  code.  The  condemnation  of  his  rich  neigh¬ 
bors  lies  in  the  fact  that  they  are  setting  at  naught 
generally  recognized  laws  and  principles.  But  to  stop 
here  in  the  summary  of  Amos’s  moral  message  would  be 
to  make  it  too  simple  and  to  leave  the  most  important 
thing  unsaid. 

Amos  quite  evidently  was  denouncing  a  social  order. 
By  the  operation  of  the  commonly  accepted  methods  of 
doing  business  in  a  competitive  way,  and  by  working 
these  methods  to  perfection,  the  weak  were  being  driven 
to  the  wall.  The  rich  were  accumulating  great  wealth, 
which  they  spent  in  reckless  luxury,  while  the  poor  were 
being  deprived  of  the  necessities  of  life.  The  days  of 
Jeroboam  II  of  Israel  lay  in  a  period  which  we  should 
characterize  as  “good  times.”  The  long  and  wearing 
struggle  with  Syria  had  been  brought  to  a  successful 
conclusion,  and  a  period  of  internal  prosperity  had  set  in. 


84 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


War  times  are  always  hardest  on  the  poor.  During  the 
peaceful  times  which  followed,  the  rich  had  been  rapidly 
widening  the  gulf  between  themselves  and  their  less 
fortunate,  or  more  scrupulous,  brethren.  Money  breeds 
money;  and  with  the  aid  of  a  little  craft,  the  rich  were 
reducing  the  poor  almost  to  servitude — indeed  in  ’some 
cases  the  poor  were  actually  sold  into  slavery.  Amos 
saw  clearly  the  drift  of  the  times,  and  set  himself  earnestly 
and  strenuously  to  stem  the  tide.  That  it  was  an  eco¬ 
nomic  situation  for  which  nobody  in  particular  was 
responsible  made  no  difference  in  his  prophetic  eyes, 
which  probably  did  not  diagnose  the  situation  economi¬ 
cally,  but  were  satisfied  to  evaluate  it  ethically.  If 
cheating,  stealing,  bribery,  and  the  like  seem  strong 
terms  for  the  prophet  to  apply  to  a  large  section  of  the 
society  of  his  day,  let  us  remember  that  Amos  was  him¬ 
self  a  poor  man  and  that  he  had  experienced  for  himself 
the  hard  lot  of  the  poorer  classes.  The  language  used 
by  Amos  is  relatively  mild  as  compared  with  that  to  be 
found  in  the  writings  and  speeches  of  some  of  the  repre¬ 
sentatives  of  socialism  and  of  labor  in  our  own  day.  The 
“ capitalist”  may  be  a  self-respecting  citizen  and  a  well- 
thought-of  neighbor  in  his  own  group;  but  he  is  an 
incarnation  of  all  that  is  evil  in  the  present  economic 
and  social  system  as  seen  by  radical  reformers,  and  is 
given  credit  for  the  meanest  motives  and  the  most  cruel 
economic  measures  by  professional  protagonists  of  the 
“ prole tariat.’’  Many  of  the  men  belonging  to  the  class 
attacked  by  Amos  doubtless  repudiated  his  charges  with 
as  much  indignation  and  sincerity  as  the  most  rigid 
“ bourbon”  of  the  present  day  manifests  in  his  protests 
of  innocence  and  self-vindication.  But  Amos  saw  that 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY  85 


something  was  wrong,  and  though  he  may  not  have  made 
an  absolutely  correct  social  or  economic  diagnosis  of 
the  ailment,  he  made  it  impossible  for  thoughtful  and 
honest  men  henceforth  to  go  on  blindly  ignoring  the 
injustice  that  infected  the  whole  social  fabric. 

44.  Hosea’s  ideals. — A  younger  contemporary  of 
Amos  was  Hosea,  not  an  outsider,  as  was  Amos,  but  a 
citizen  of  the  Northern  Kingdom.  Conditions  had 
developed  rapidly  in  the  few  years  that  had  passed 
since  the  preaching  of  Amos,  and  Hosea’s  message  was 
addressed  to  this  tenser  situation.  Hosea’s  primary 
interest  differed  from  that  of  Amos  in  that  he  concerned 
himself  chiefly  with  man’s  conception  of  God  and  his 
relationship  to  God,  while  Amos  stressed  almost  exclu¬ 
sively  man’s  relations  to  his  fellow-man.  Hosea’s 
message  is  naturally,  therefore,  not  social  and  ethical  to 
the  extent  that  Amos’s  was.  Hosea  makes  not  a  single 
direct  reference  to  the  poor  as  such.  He  was  more 
“ religious”  in  his  point  of  view  than  Amos,  though  he 
paid  sufficient  attention  to  moral  issues  to  show  that 
his  religion  was  by  no  means  indifferent  to  these  things. 
He  indorses  blood-revenge  in  that  he  represents  Yahweh 
as  acting  upon  that  principle1  (1:4);  he  decries  harlotry 
and  adultery  (2:5;  4:2,  13,  14,  18;  5:3;  7:4;  '9:1); 
he  denounces  murder  (4:2;  6:8,  9);  he  deplores  the 
lack  of  truth,  mercy,  and  knowledge  of  God  (4: 1)  among 
his  contemporaries;  and  he  condemns  perjury  (4:2; 
10:4),  theft  (4:2;  7:1),  drunkenness  (4:18),  lying  and 
deceit  (7:1,  13;  11:12;  12:1),  the  breaking  of  contracts 

1  This  custom  was  of  long-time  standing  in  Israel  and  was  thus 
deep  rooted  in  the  social  life  and  thought.  Hence  even  the  prophets 
approve  it,  strange  as  it  may  seem  to  us. 


86 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


(4:2),  burglary  (7:1),  the  use  of  false  balances  (12:7), 
the  practice  of  oppression  (12:7),  and  the  stealing  of  land 
by  the  removal  of  the  landmarks-  (5 : 10).  Like  Amos,  he 
will  have  none  of  ritual  as  a  substitute  for  morals: 

I  desire  goodness  and  not  sacrifice, 

And  the  knowledge  of  God  more  than  burnt-offerings  [6:6]. 

It  is  Israel’s  tragedy  that  she  has  rejected  the  good 
(8:3),  and  that,  therefore,  “  judgment  springs  up  like 
hemlock  in  the  furrows  of  the  field”  (10:4).  Whatever 
goodness  she  has  lacks  depth;  it  is  a  mere  fleeting  emo¬ 
tion,  too  facile  and  superficial  (6:4).  The  things  that 
JYahweh  wants  are  righteousness,  justice,  loving-kindness, 
mercy,  and  faithfulness  (2:19,  20). 

Sow  for  yourselves  righteousness; 

Reap  the  fruit  of  piety; 

Break  up  for  yourselves  an  unused  field  of  knowledge;  » 

Seek  Yahweh,  till  the  fruit  of  righteousness  come  to  you 
[10: 12].1 

Such  words  as  these  show  that  for  Hosea,  even  as  for 
Amos,  piety  was  expected  to  yield  its  reward.  Piety 
ought  to  pay;  and  if  prosperity  is  not  being  enjoyed  it 
is  clear  that  something  is  wrong  with  the  piety.  This 
was  always  the  moral  philosophy  of  the  prophets;  they 
and  the  people  were  of  the  same  mind  in  expecting  religion 
to  pay  good  dividends;  the  only  point  of  difference  on 
this  question  was  as  to  the  brand  of  religion  that  should 
be  practiced.  The  rewards  looked  for  were  very  tangible 
and  concrete  (Hos.  2:18-23).  The  penalties  for  the 
lack  of  piety  are  equally  realistic. 


1  Corrected  in  part  after  the  Greek. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTtfRY  87 


The  iniquity  of  Ephraim  is  bound  up; 

His  sin  is  laid  up  in  store. 

The  sorrows  of  a  travailing  woman  shall  come  upon  him; 

He  is  an  unwise  son; 

For  now  he  should  not  stand  in  the  place  of  the  breaking 
forth  of  children. 

Shall  I  ransom  them  from  the  power  of  the  grave  ? 

Shall  I  redeem  them  from  death  ? 

O  death,  where  are  thy  plagues  ? 

O  grave,  where  is  thy  destruction  ? 

Repentance  shall  be  hid  from  mine  eyes. 

Though  he  be  fruitful  among  his  brethren, 

An  east  wind  shall  come,  the  breath  of  Yahweh  coming 
up  from  the  wilderness, 

And  his  spring  shall  become  dry, 

And  his  fountain  shall  be  dried  up. 

He  shall  spoil  the  treasure  of  all  pleasant  vessels. 

Samaria  will  be  laid  waste; 

For  she  has  rebelled  against  her  God. 

They  shall  fall  by  the  sword ; 

Their  infants  shall  be  dashed  in  pieces; 

And  their  women  with  child  shall  be  ripped  up 
[Hos.  13:12-16]. 

45.  Hosea’s  marriage. — The  most  interesting  part  of 
the  Book  of  Hosea  is  the  story  of  his  marriage  in  chapters 
1-3.  This  has  been  the  subject  of  much  discussion 
extending  over  many  centuries.1  The  most  popular 
view  at  the  present  time  is  that  which  represents  Hosea 
as  having  fallen  in  love  with  a  young  woman  of  sensuous 
tendencies,  only  to  have  her  prove  untrue  to  him  and, 
after  the  birth  of  three  children,  of  whom  two  at  least 
were  not  Hosea’s,  desert  him  and  take  up  her  residence 
with  another  man.  Notwithstanding  all  this,  the  great 

1  For  the  history  of  the  interpretation  of  Hosea’s  marriage,  see 
W.  R.  Harper,  Amos  and  Hosea  (1905),  pp.  208-10. 


88 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


love  of  Hosea  leads  him  to  buy  his  wife  back  from  her 
paramour  and  to  place  her  under  restraint  preparatory 
to  receiving  her  back  into  his  own  home.  This  tragic 
experience  Hosea  looks  back  upon  and  interprets  as 
Yahweh’s  call  to  him  to  become  a  prophet  to  Israel,  who 
has  treated  Yahweh  exactly  as  Gomer  treated  Hosea. 
So  Hosea  gets  his  message  out  of  the  agony  of  his  own 
soul  and  personally  discovers  the  truth  that  Yahweh’s 
love  for  Israel  has  been  cruelly  spurned  by  his  people.1 
The  ethical  significance  of  the  record  on  such  a  basis 
would  be  very  great.  But  attractive  as  the  theory  is, 
it  will  not  bear  close  scrutiny,  and  must  give  way  to  a 
more  natural  and  simple  treatment  of  the  story.2 

The  literal  meaning  of  the  story  is  clear  enough,  viz., 
that  Hosea  felt  himself  called  upon  by  Yahweh  to  marry 
a  notoriously  bad  woman  and  accordingly  did  so. 
From  this  marriage  three  children  were  born,  each  of 
whom,  like  the  marriage  itself,  was  made  the  occasion 
for  a  new  sermon  upon  the  same  old  theme,  viz.,  that 
Yahweh  will  cast  off  his  faithless  people  that  has  no  sense 
of  its  obligation  to  its  spiritual  husband  and  lord,  even 
Yahweh  himself,  and  will  send  it  into  exile  till  such  time 

1  For  a  full  statement  of  this  view,  see  W.  R.  Harper,  op.  cit.,  pp. 
cxliii-cxlv;  and  G.  A.  Smith,  Book  of  the  Twelve ,  I,  232-52. 

2  For  a  fuller  discussion  of  the  marriage  from  the  literal  point  of 
view  here  followed,  see  J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  The  Prophet  and  His  Problems 
(1914),  pp.  109-36,  and  idem,  Amos,  Hosea  and  Micah  (1914),  pp.  77-82. 
B.  Duhm,  Israels  Propheten  (1916),  pp.  98  f.,  now  takes  the  same 
literal  point  of  view,  but  makes  Hosea  marry  in  succession  two  wives 
of  the  same  type.  Similar  literal  views  are  presented  also  by  C.  H. 
Toy,  in  Journal  of  Biblical  Literature ,  XXXII,  75-79;  and  D.  Buzy, 
Revue  biblique  for  1917,  pp.  376-423.  Cf.  G.  A.  Barton,  The  Religion  of 
Israel  (1918),  pp.  99  f.;  and  G.  Holscher,  Geschichte  der  Israel itischen  und 
jiidischen  Religion  (1922),  p.  106. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY  89 


as  it  shall  awake  to  the  advantages  of  its  former  relation¬ 
ship  and  shall  long  for  its  resumption.  The  ethical  prin¬ 
ciple  involved  is  very  simple  and  clear,  viz.,  that  it  is 
the  part  of  a  true  wife  to  abide  loyally  by  her  own  hus¬ 
band  and  to  have  naught  to  do  with  any  other  man.  But 
in  addition  to  this  obvious  and  intended  teaching  as 
applied  to  the  duty  of  Israel  toward  Yahweh,  there  are 
also  some  incidental  facts  of  some  significance.  How 
could  Hosea  ever  have  entertained  the  conviction  that 
Yahweh  wanted  him  to  marry  a  harlot?  This  is  in 
reality  no  more  difficult  from  the  moral  approach  than 
it  is  to  suppose  that  he  thought  of  Yahweh  as  having 
led  him  blindfolded  into  such  a  match  only  to  break  his 
heart.  For  Yahweh  to  order  him  to  marry  a  harlot  is, 
at  any  rate,  no  worse  than  for  Yahweh  to  order  him  to 
marry  a  charming  girl  who,  as  Yahweh  knows  right  well, 
will  turn  out  to  be  wholly  unworthy  of  his  love  and 
untrue  to  her  marital  obligations.  Further,  to  think  of 
Yahweh  as  commanding  marriage  with  a  harlot  is  no 
more  difficult  or  abhorrent  than  to  think  of  him  as  in¬ 
spiring  four  hundred  prophets  to  lie  (I  Kings  22 : 20-23), 
or  as  hardening  Pharaoh’s  heart  to  the  end  that  he  might 
destroy  him  (Exod.  7:3,  4;  10:1),  or  as  moving  David 
to  number  Israel  in  order  that  he  might  be  justified  in 
punishing  him,  and  then  punishing  him  by  slaying  great 
numbers  of  his  innocent  people  (II  Sam.  24:1  ff.).  Nor 
was  the  marriage  itself  more  extraordinary  than  some 
other  acts  performed  by  early  prophets.  The  psychology 
of  a  prophet  was  not  that  of  the  normal  layman.  He 
was  nearer  being  abnormal  than  normal  at  times. 
Indeed  the  early  Hebrews  used  the  same  word  to  express 
both  the  idea  of  prophecy  and  that  of  insanity.  The 


4 


go 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


more  sensational  an  act  was  the  greater  its  homiletic 
or  prophetic  value  (cf.  Ezek.  4:9-15;  24:16-18;  Isa. 
20:1-4;  Jer.  16:1  f.).  The  extraordinary  character  of 
the  marriage  gave  it  its  value  as  a  prophetic  deed.  It 
compelled  attention  and  focused  interest  in  such  a  way  ‘ 
as  to  afford  the  prophet  wide  scope  for  the  preaching 
of  the  message  he  sought  to  impress  upon  Israel  through 
his  marriage. 

We  cannot  give  our  farewell  to  Hosea  without  noting 
one  element  of  his  character  that  is  forcefully  illustrated 
by  his  marriage. 

This  interpretation  of  the  marriage  experience  emphasizes 
the  self-sacrifice  of  Hosea.  He  looks  upon  himself  as  belonging 
wholly  to  his  people  and  to  his  God.  There  is  no  sacrifice  for 
the  good  of  Israel  or  for  the  service  of  Yahweh  that  can  be  called 
too  great.  He  is  a  willing  tool  in  Yahweh’s  hands,  absolutely 
submissive  to  Yahweh’s  will.  Shall  the  clay  say  to  him  who 

molds  it,  “What  makest  thou?”  [Isa.  45:9] . The  man  who 

could  take  upon  himself  a  relationship  like  that  and  could  exploit 
his  act  for  the  education  of  the  public  was  not  only  utterly  self- 
abasing  and  self-effacing  in  his  devotion  to  his  country,  but  was 
evidently  endowed  with  a  strongly  dramatic  temperament. 
This,  combined  with  the  inherent  value  of  his  message,  succeeded 
in  impressing  his  preaching  deeply  upon  the  consciousness  of 
Israel  so  that  it  became  a  permanent  element  in  Hebrew  religion.1 

46.  Social  message  of  Isaiah.— We  hear  the  social  note 
clearly  again  in  the  oracles  of  Isaiah.  Isaiah’s  lot  was  cast 
in  troublous  times.  His  preaching  years  extended  from 
740  b.c.  to  701  b.c.  at  least.  In  these  years  he  lived 
through  the  Syro-Ephraimitish  War  (735-734  b.c.),  the 
fall  of  Damascus  (732  b.c.),  the  siege  and  fall  of  Samaria 
(721  b.c.),  Sargon’s  campaign  against  Ashdod  (711  b.c.), 

1  J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  Amos,  Hosea  and  Micah  (1914),  pp.  81  ff. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 


91 


and  Sennacherib’s  invasion  of  Judah  (701  b.c.).  The 
Assyrian  Empire,  under  four  of  its  greatest  kings,  Tiglath- 
pileser  III,  Shalmaneser  IV,  Sargon  II,  and  Sennacherib, 
was  remaking  the  map  of  Western  Asia.  Syria  and 
Northern  Israel  had  become  provinces  of  the  Assyrian 
Empire;  and  Judah,  after  surrendering  its  independence 
to  Assyria,  broke  out  in  futile  revolt  against  her  only  to 
be  reduced  again  to  submission  and  subjected  to  heavy 
penalties.  Amid  such  scenes,  the  work  of  Isaiah  was 
inevitably  national  rather  than  individualistic  in  its 
scope  and  interests. 

We  discover  here  again  that  interest  in  the  welfare 
of  the  poor  which  was  so  conspicuous  in  Amos  and  so 
deficient  in  Hosea: 

Cease  to  do  evil;  learn  to  do  good; 

Seek  justice;  repress  violence; 

Give  justice  to  the  fatherless;  plead  the  cause  of  the 
widow  [Isa.  1:16,  17]. 

But  you — ye  uproot  the  vineyard, 

The  plunder  of  the  poor  is  in  your  houses. 

What  mean  ye  that  ye  crush  my  people, 

And  grind  the  faces  of  the  poor  [3 : 14,  15]  ? 

Woe  to  those  who  decree  unrighteous  decrees, 

And  recorders  who  record  trouble, 

So  as  to  turn  aside  the  poor  from  judgment, 

And  to  rob  the  poor  of  my  people  of  justice, 

So  that  widows  become  their  spoil, 

And  they  plunder  the  fatherless  [10:1,  2]. 

The  methods  by  which  the  rich  and  powerful  impoverish 
the  poorer  classes  are  clearly  suggested  not  only  here  but 
in  other  passages  likewise.  They  are  the  familiar,  age¬ 
long  means  of  oppression,  already  exposed  by  Amos. 


92 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


A  servile  court  is  only  too  ready  to  do  the  bidding  of  the 
rich  and  is  not  without  its  reward. 

They  acquit  the  guilty  in  return  for  a  bribe, 

And  the  vindication  of  the  innocent  they  turn  aside 
from  him  [5:23]. 

Bribery  and  corruption  are  the  tools  of  their  trade  (cf. 
1:21,  23,  26).  By  these  and  other  means,  represented 
in  modern  times  by  exorbitant  interest,  foreclosure  of 
mortgages  on  the  instant,  controlling  the  market  and 
the  like,  the  poor  man  has  been  driven  from  his  little 
patrimony  and  left  landless  and  homeless,  while  the 
rich  oppressors 

Add  house  to  house  and  field  to  field 
Till  there  is  no  more  room  [5:8]. 

The  economic  and  social  problem  raised  by  the  increase 
of  large  landed  estates  was  evidently  being  keenly  felt; 
and  the  essential  wrong  of  one  man  owning  extensive 
acres  at  the  expense  of  other  men  who  lost  all  they  had 
appeals  powerfully  to  the  prophet’s  sense  of  justice. 

The  possession  of  so  much  ill-gotten  wealth  by  a 
relatively  small  class  of  people  had  its  natural  effect. 
In  Isaiah’s  judgment,  there  was  a  general  moral  break¬ 
down.  Personal  morality  was  on  the  decline.  Violence 
and  bloodshed  were  abroad  in  the  land  (5:7);  drunken¬ 
ness  and  debauchery  were  the  order  of  the  day  (5:11, 
22,  23;  22:13),  and  the  women  have  nothing  better  to 
do  than  to  spend  time  and  money  upon  lavish  personal 
adornment  of  which  they  are  sinfully  proud  (2:16-24). 
The  concomitant  of  such  a  situation  is  that  the  moral 
sense  is  becoming  dulled;  there  is  a  lack  of  keen  moral 
discrimination  and  a  general  unresponsiveness  to  ideal¬ 
istic  instruction  and  a  smug  self-satisfaction. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 


93 


Woe  to  those  who  call  badness  good  and  goodness  bad, 

That  regard  darkness  as  light,  and  light  as  darkness, 

That  consider  bitter  sweet,  and  sweet  bitter. 

Woe  to  the  wise  in  their  own  eyes, 

And  intelligent  in  their  own  sight  [5:20,  21]. 

The  response  of  such  people  to  the  warning  of  danger  is 
but  to  plunge  deeper  into  debauchery  and  say  flippantly: 
Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  tomorrow  we  may  die  [22:13]! 

They  have  indeed  become  deaf  to  all  appeals  (6:9-13). 

The  inevitable  reaction  from  all  this,  as  Isaiah 
declares,  will  be  a  general  overturning  of  social  values, 
which  he  describes  in  such  a  vivid  way  as  almost  to 
suggest  that  he  had  the  bolshevistic  society  of  Russia 
before  his  mind’s  eye  (3:1-5).  Destruction  and  that 
complete  is  the  only  possible  outcome  of  the  existing 
situation;  naught  else  can  result  from  such  unmitigated 
wickedness : 

For  wickedness  burns  up  like  a  fire  which  devours  briars 
and  thorns, 

And  kindles  in  the  thickets  of  the  forest, 

And  clouds  of  smoke  roll  up  [9:17]. 

47.  Isaiah  and  ritual. — Isaiah’s  attitude  toward  ritual 
should  be  particularly  noted,  because  it  is  so  clear  and 
so  representative  of  the  prophets  in  general: 

Hear  the  word  of  Yahweh, 

Ye  rulers  of  Sodom; 

Give  ear  unto  the  instruction  of  our  God, 

Ye  people  of  Gomorrah. 

To  what  end  is  the  multitude  of  your  sacrifices  unto  me, 
saith  Yahweh. 

I  am  full  of  the  burnt-offerings  of  rams, 

And  the  fat  of  fed  beasts; 

And  I  delight  not  in  the  blood  of  bullocks, 


94 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Or  of  lambs,  or  of  he-goats. 

When  you  come  to  appear  before  me, 

Who  has  required  this  at  your  hand — 

The  trampling  of  my  courts  ? 

Bring  no  more  vain  oblations; 

It  is  an  offering  of  abomination  unto  me; 

New  moon  and  sabbath,  the  holding  of  assemblies. 

I  cannot  endure  iniquity  along  with  the  solemn  meeting. 
Your  new  moons  and  your  appointed  seasons 
My  soul  hates; 

They  are  a  burden  to  me; 

I  am  weary  of  bearing  them. 

And  when  you  spread  forth  your  hands, 

I  will  hide  mine  eyes  from  you; 

Yea,  when  you  make  many  prayers, 

I  will  not  hear; 

Your  hands  are  full  of  blood. 

Wash  you,  make  you  clean, 

Put  away  the  evil  of  your  doings 
From  before  mine  eyes. 

Cease  to  do  evil; 

Learn  to  do  good; 

Seek  justice,  relieve  the  oppressed; 

Judge  the  fatherless; 

Plead  for  the  widow  [i :  10-17]. 

There  is  little  of  the  prophetic  language  as  pronounced  as 
this  in  its  hostility  to  the  practice  of  the  cultus  as  it  was 
then  in  vogue.  Yet  it  would  be  a  great  error  to  charge 
Isaiah  with  any  desire  to  do  away  with  ritual  and  sub¬ 
stitute  for  it  good  works  in  the  field  of  ethics.  This  is 
clear  from  his  remarks  here  regarding  prayer.  Certainly 
Isaiah  would  not  abolish  prayer.  Rather  he  desires  that 
the  prayers  may  come  from  clean  hearts  and  lips.  A 
just  and  generous  life  is  the  necessary  background  of 
true  religion;  and  ceremonial,  no  matter  how  generous 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 


95 


and  elaborate,  cannot  take  the  place  of  true  and  upright 
living.  This  is  far  from  saying  that  ritual  may  not  be 
a  helpful  concomitant  of  piety.  Indeed,  it  evidently 
was  so  in  Isaiah’s  own  case.  For  the  great  initial  experi¬ 
ence  that  sent  him  forth  into  a  prophetic  career  was 
staged  in  the  temple  (chap.  6),  and  reflects  a  mind  very 
responsive  to  the  influence  of  dignified  and  majestic 
forms. 

48.  Isaiah’s  call. — This  account  of  Isaiah’s  call 
(chap.  6)  is  an  eloquent  witness  to  the  high  sense  of  obliga¬ 
tion  that  possessed  Isaiah’s  soul.  Not  every  young  man 
of  position  and  influence  saw  the  weakness  of  the  religious 
and  social  systems  of  his  day;  and  of  the  few  who  may 
have  seen  it,  only  an  Isaiah  or  a  Micah  felt  called  upon 
to  undertake  the  task  of  calling  his  contemporaries  to 
the  search  for  higher  and  better  things.  Visions  of 
Yahweh  calling  for  volunteers  to  self-denying  service 
were  vouchsafed  only  to  the  high-minded  and  large- 
hearted.  It  is  ethically  significant  that  this  vision  sees 
Yahweh  as  the  great  destroyer.  His  holiness  is  a  terrible, 
cleansing  agency  that  removes  sin  by  destroying  the 
sinner.  The  primitive  metaphysical  conception  of 
holiness  as  the  essence  of  deity  in  distinction  from 
humanity,  as  that  which  makes  God  to  be  God,  is  very 
clear  in  this  vision;  but  it  is  also  clear  that  we  have  here 
a  long  step  in  the  direction  of  ethicizing  the  quality  of 
holiness  so  that  it  shall  become  an  effective  ally  of 
righteousness.  At  least  Isaiah  goes  forth,  after  this 
vision  of  the  thrice  holy  Yahweh,  to  call  his  people  to 
social  righteousness  and  purity  of  life. 

49.  Piety  and  prosperity. — Isaiah’s  conception  of  the 
value  of  righteousness  to  a  people  is  one  with  that  of 


g6 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  other  prophets.  Piety  is  the  key  to  prosperity.  This 
appears  throughout  his  preaching;  but  is  most  clearly 
expressed  in  this  passage: 

Come  now,  let  us  reason  together,  says  Yahweh. 

If  your  sins  be  as  scarlet, 

Can  they  be  white  like  snow  ? 

If  they  be  red  like  crimson, 

Can  they  be  like  wool  ? 

If  you  be  willing  and  hearken, 

The  good  of  the  land  you  shall  eat ; 

But  if  you  refuse  and  rebel, 

On  husks  you  shall  feed  [i :  18,  19].1 

The  point  of  this  is,  of  course,  that  it  is  unreasonable, 
yea  preposterous,  to  expect  to  go  on  in  sin  and  yet  to  be 
treated  by  Yahweh  as  though  they  were  paragons  of 
virtue;  the  only  royal  road  to  prosperity  is  the  way 
of  piety. 

50.  Social  ideals  of  Micah. — The  prophecy  of  the 
eighth  century  closed  with  Micah,  whose  activity  fell 
around  the  invasion  of  701  b.c.2  Only  three  chapters 
of  the  book  carrying  his  name  can  with  any  certainty 
be  credited  to  Micah  himself — the  rest  are  probably  of 
later  origin.3  But  these  three  chapters  are  full  of 
social  and  ethical  passion.  Micah’s  sermons  reflect  the 
same  facts  and  glow  with  the  same  ideals  as  those  of 

1  For  the  translation  of  the  last  line,  see  Gray,  ICC ,  in  loc.  The 
interrogative  rendering  of  lines  3  and  5  seems  to  me  demanded  by  the 
logic  of  the  passage,  notwithstanding  Dr.  Burney’s  argument  that  a 
question  without  an  interrogative  particle  is  never  found  in  the  apodosis 
of  a  conditional  sentence  {Journal  of  Theological  Studies ,  XI,  433-35). 
The  lack  of  such  another  instance  may  be  purely  fortuitous;  there  is 
nothing  in  principle  to  prevent  such  a  usage. 

2  See  J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  Micah  {ICC),  pp.  19  if. 

3  Ibid.,  pp.  8-16. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY  97 

Amos  and  Isaiah.  Amos  lived  on  the  slopes  overlooking 
the  Dead  Sea;  Isaiah  dwelt  in  Jerusalem  itself;  Micah’s 
home  was  on  the  western  slope  overlooking  the  Medi¬ 
terranean.  Thus  we  have  witnesses  to  the  social  condi¬ 
tions  and  ideals  in  all  parts  of  the  little  country  of 
Judah. 

The  central  difficulty  with  the  attitude  of  his  people 
as  Micah  saw  it  lay  in  the  fact  that  they  were  unable  to 
imagine  Yahweh  as  capable  of  anything  but  kindness  1/ 
and  protection  toward  them.  They  were  discharging  the 
routine  obligations  of  the  cultus  and  keeping  the  letter 
of  the  law,  and  felt  themselves  thereby  entitled  to  the 
reward  of  Yahweh’s  favor.  If  a  god  be  not  gracious  to 
his  worshipers,  why  worship  him  ?  So  they  expostulate 
with  the  prophet: 

Do  not  keep  harping  upon  such  things. 

Shame  cannot  overtake  the  house  of  Jacob. 

Is  Yahweh  impatient,  or  are  such  his  deeds  ? 

Do  not  his  words  mean  good  to  Israel  [2:6,  7]  ? 

They  are  guilty  of  all  kinds  of  antisocial  conduct  and  yet 
they  count  upon  Yahweh’s  approval  and  co-operation: 

Hear  this,  now,  ye  heads  of  the  house  of  Jacob, 

And  rulers  of  the  house  of  Israel; 

Who  abhor  justice, 

And  pervert  all  that  is  right; 

Who  build  Zion  with  blood, 

And  Jerusalem  with  iniquity. 

Her  chiefs  judge  for  a  bribe, 

And  her  priests  give  oracles  for  hire, 

And  her  prophets  divine  for  money; 

Yet  upon  Yahweh  they  lean,  saying, 

“Is  not  Yahweh  in  the  midst  of  us ? 

No  evil  can  befall  us”  [3:9-11]. 


98 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


51.  Idea  of  God. — It  was  the  task  of  Micah,  just  as  it 
was  that  of  Amos  and  Isaiah,  to  socialize  and  ethicize 
the  popular  conception  of  God.  The  people  of  the 
eighth  century  b.c.  were  not  deficient  in  religion;  their 
need  was  rather  for  a  richer  and  more  humanized  religion. 
The  prophets  brought  all  the  authority  and  power  of 
the  God-idea  to  the  support  and  re-enforcement  of  their 
demand  for  social  conduct.  Micah  denounces  the  wrongs 
of  his  day  not  merely  as  antisocial,  but  also  and  prima¬ 
rily  as  offensive  to  God.  He  charges  the  rich  and  ruling 
class  with  driving  the  peasant  from  his  land  (2 : 1  f .)  and 
ejecting  the  poor  from  their  homes  (2:1,  2,  9),  with 
plundering  the  public  (2:8;  3:2),  and  with  being  funda¬ 
mentally  hostile  to  everything  good  and  set  upon  all  that 
is  bad  (2 : 1  ff.;  3 : 1  ff.).  Even  the  professional  servants 
of  God,  the  priests  and  the  prophets,  are  slaves  to  the 
greed  for  gain,  which  they  satisfy  by  the  prostitution  of 
their  calling  to  the  desires  of  the  rich  (3 : 5-8,  1 1) .  For  all 
these  things  Yahweh  will  bring  them  into  judgment: 

Therefore,  on  your  account, 

Zion  will  be  ploughed  as  a  field, 

And  Jerusalem  will  become  ruins, 

And  the  mountain  of  the  house  a  high  place  in  a  forest 
[3:12]. 

52.  Idealism  of  prophets. — Looking  back  upon  these 
pictures  of  conditions  in  the  eighth  century  b.c.  as 
painted  by  the  prophets,  we  must  raise  the  question  as 
to  whether  or  not  we  are  to  take  the  prophetic  statements 
and  descriptions  as  literally  matter  of  fact.  We  must 
remember  that  the  prophets  were  idealists  and  that  to 
the  idealist,  reality  is  always  very  distressing  and  de¬ 
pressing.  Were  the  common  citizens  and  their  rulers  in 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  EIGHTH  CENTURY 


99 


Israel  and  Judah  as  wholly  bad,  as  completely  selfish, 
as  restricted  and  materialistic  in  their  outlook  as  the 
prophets  represent  them  to  have  been?  May  not  the 
prophets  in  the  excess  of  their  enthusiasm  for  their  ideals 
have  painted  existing  conditions  a  little  blacker  than  they 
really  were?  Is  not  this  a  common  homiletic  failing? 
The  reason  for  raising  this  question  is  that  the  citizens 
of  Samaria  at  the  time  of  its  downfall  held  out  against 
the  mighty  Assyrian  army  for  a  period  of  almost  three 
years.  Similarly  the  men  of  Jerusalem  withstood  Sen¬ 
nacherib’s  army  stubbornly.  These  facts  argue  for 
courage  and  determination  on  the  part  of  the  defenders. 
They  are  convincing  proof  of  the  existence  of  a  high 
morale  among  the  Jewish  people.  The  contemporaries 
of  the  eighth -century  prophets  may  not  have  been 
idealists  after  the  prophet’s  own  heart,  but  they  were 
sturdy,  liberty-loving  patriots  who  knew  how  to  fight  to 
the  finish  for  their  home  and  country.  We  need  not 
despise  or  underestimate  the  character  of  these  plain 
men  of  homely  habits  and  monotonous  manners  in  order 
to  appreciate  properly  their  critics,  the  great  prophets. 
It  is  the  imperishable  glory  of  these  greater  souls  that 
they  were  filled  with  a  divine  discontent  which  led  them 
to  abjure  the  lure  of  present  comfort  and  to  press  on  to 
the  attainment  of  a  better  social  order.  The  ideals 
they  cherished  did  not  die  with  them,  but  continued  to 
be  the  inspiration  of  succeeding  generations. 


CHAPTER  V 


THE  PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY 

53.  The  seventh  century  in  Israel  was  a  period  of 
stirring  events.  Beginning  right  after  the  tragedy  of 
Sennacherib’s  invasion  in  701  b.c.,  it  closed  just  before 
the  first  deportation  from  Judah  in  597  b.c.  Between 
these  outstanding  termini  there  came  in  swift  succession 
Assurbanipal’s  invasion  of  Egypt  and  the  resulting  down¬ 
fall  of  Thebes  (666  B.c.);  the  Scythian  invasion  of 
Western  Asia  and  Egypt  (ca.  625  b.c.)  ;  Pharaoh  Necho’s 
invasion  of  Western  Asia,  involving  the  battle  of  Megiddo, 
in  which  King  Josiah  of  Judah  was  slain  (608  b.c.),  and 
the  battle  of  Carchemish,  in  which  Egypt  was  finally 
repulsed  (604  b.c.);  and  the  downfall  of  Assyria,  with 
the  capture  of  Nineveh  by  the  Medes  and  Babylonians, 
in  607  b.c.  While  these  great  events  were  taking  place 
without,  within  Judah  was  in  a  state  of  turmoil.  After 
the  withdrawal  of  Sennacherib,  Judah  sorely  stricken  as 
she  was,  found  it  hard  to  keep  a  vital  faith  in  Yahweh, 
and  under  Manasseh  and  Amon  there  set  in  a  period  of 
religious  and  moral  reaction,  during  which  there  was  a 
vigorous  recrudescence  of  old  pagan  practices,  the 
thought  being  that  since  Yahweh  had  failed  to  protect 
his  people  it  would  be  well  to  revert  to  older  customs 
and  to  seek  the  aid  of  mightier  gods.  But  under  Josiah, 
the  prophetic  ideals  once  more  found  recognition.  They 
were  voiced  by  Zephaniah,  Jeremiah,  Nahum,  and  Ha- 
bakkuk,  and  were  in  part  enacted  into  law  and  made 
operative  by  the  Deuteronomic  reformation  in  621  b.c. 


100 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  ioi 


We  shall  leave  the  work  of  the  Deuteronomists  for  a 
separate  chapter,  and  take  up  here  the  prophetic  ethics 
as  expressed  in  the  later  additions  to  J  and  E,  in  the 
utterances  of  the  prophets  just  named,  and  in  the  facts 
recorded  in  the  history  of  the  century  as  told  in  the 
second  Book  of  Kings. 

54.  Israel  and  foreign  nations. — In  such  a  century  as 
this  was,  with  Israel  continuously  at  the  mercy  of  foreign 
powers,  it  is  natural  to  find  in  its  literature  a  very 
-definite  attitude  toward  foreigners.  Invaded  by  Assyr¬ 
ians  and  forced  to  pay  heavy  annual  tribute,  threatened 
and  perhaps  raided  by  Scythians,  reduced  to  vassalage 
and  robbed  of  its  king  by  Egypt,  and  finally  compelled 
to  accept  Babylonian  suzerainty  and  see  large  groups 
of  its  citizens  and  its  last  king  carried  into  exile,  its 
capital  city  rendered  defenseless,  and  its  holy  temple 
destroyed,  it  would  be  passing  strange  if  feelings  of 
hostility,  resentment,  and  revenge  had  not  found  lodg¬ 
ment  in  the  heart  of  Israel.  And  they  are  not  lacking. 
Nor  are  Yahweh  or  Israel  thought  of  in  general  as  under 
obligation  of  any  sort  to  non-Hebraic  peoples.  Jacob 
prays  Yahweh  to  deliver  him  from  the  just  wrath  of 
Esau  and  is  delivered  (Gen.  32:9-12).  The  slaughter  of 
Egypt’s  first-born  is  but  tit-for-tat  in  return  for  Egypt’s 
slaughter  of  the  Hebrew  first-born  (Exod.  4:22,  23). 
Israel  is  Yahweh’s  own  choice  possession  (Exod.  19:3  ff.), 
j  v  and  thus  entitled  to  special  favor  as  over  against  non- 
Yahwistic  peoples.  Indeed,  Yahweh’s  reputation  among 
the  nations  of  the  world  depends  upon  his  preserving  his 
own  people  from  destruction  (Num.  14: 12-19).  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  perfectly  proper  for  him  to  harden 
Pharaoh’s  heart,  to  the  end  that  he  may  have  full  war- 


102 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


rant  for  destroying  him  and  his  people  (Exod.  4:21  f.). 
It  should  be  noted  here  that  Yahweh  cannot  be  thought 
of  as  destroying  a  people  without  moral  justification  for 
the  act,  even  if  he  does  have  to  furnish  that  justification 
by  his  own  initiative.  Yahweh  has  no  scruples  about 
undertaking  to  “blot  out  the  remembrance  of  the 
Amalekites  under  heaven”  (Exod.  17:14).  Zephaniah 
does  not  hesitate  to  announce  a  world-wide  destruction 
and  devastation  from  which  only  loyal  Yahweh- 
worshipers  may  escape  (Zeph.  1:2  ff.,  18;  3:8). 

The  continuous  domination  of  Israel  by  the  foreigner 
presented  a  problem  to  the  Yahweh- worshipers  which 
they  were  not  slow  to  recognize.  Nahum  and  many 
other  orthodox  souls  found  great  relief  and  comfort  in 
contemplating  the  fall  of  Nineveh,  marking  the  end  of 
the  Assyrian  Empire.  In  Nahum  there  appears  a  cer¬ 
tain  fiery  form  of  indignation  against  Judah’s  ancient 
foe,  which  exhibits  a  degree  of  animosity  for  which  the 
great  ethical  prophets  furnish  no  parallel.  The  pent-up 
feelings  of  generations  of  suffering  patriots  here  burst 
forth  into  flame.  The  whole  prophecy  is  a  paean  of 
triumph  over  a  prostrate  foe  and  breathes  out  the  spirit 
of  exultant  revenge.  In  Nahum,  a  representative  of 
the  old,  narrow,  and  shallow  prophetism  finds  his  place  in 
the  Canon  of  Scripture.  His  point  of  view  is  essentially 
one  with  that  of  such  men  as  Hananiah  (Jer.,  chap.  28), 
the  four  hundred  prophets  in  opposition  to  Micaiah 
ben  Imlah  (I  Kings,  chap.  22),  and  the  so-called  “false 
prophets”  in  general.  For  such  prophets,  the  relation, 
between  Yahweh  and  his  nation  Israel  was  indissoluble. ? 
Yahweh  might  become  angered  at  his  people  and 
give  them  over  temporarily  into  the  power  of  the  foe. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  103 


But  he  could  no  more  wholly  abandon  them  than  a 
mother  could  desert  her  child.  The  obligation  upon 
Israel  was  to  be  loyal  to  Yahweh  as  he  was  loyal  to 
her;  to  eschew  all  foreign  cults;  to  perform  the  cultus 
of  Yahweh  with  zealous  adherence  to  all  of  its  require¬ 
ments;  and  to  conform  to  the  traditional  customs  and 
ethics  of  the  community.  The  possibility  that  “new 
occasions  might  teach  new  duties,”  that  the  advancing 
civilization  with  its  more  complex  life  might  render  the 
old  usages  and  laws  inadequate,  and  that  Yahweh  might 
care  more  for  full  justice  and  overflowing  mercy  than  for 
the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats,  had  not  been  realized  by 
them.  The  teaching  that  for  a  lack  of  fundamental, 
ethical  qualities  Yahweh  was  intending  to  bring  destruc¬ 
tion  upon  his  nation  was  branded  by  them  as  treason 
both  to  Israel  and  to  Yahweh.  Patriotism  and  religion 
combined  in  requiring  the  belief  that  Yahweh  was  able 
and  willing  to  deliver  his  people  out  of  every  danger. 
Never  could  he  suffer  the  adherents  of  other  gods  to 
triumph  permanently  over  his  own  people.  Never  could 
the  land  of  Judah  and  the  temple  of  Yahweh  be  des¬ 
ecrated  by  being  abandoned  to  the  possession  of  the 
heathen.  Nor  could  insult  and  injury  to  Yahweh  and 
his  people  be  allowed  by  him  to  go  unavenged.  To  men 
of  such  a  way  of  thinking,  the  prospect  of  the  downfall 
of  Nineveh  would  bring  a  joy  without  alloy.  The 
prophecy  of  Nahum  is  a  faithful  transcript  of  the 
thoughts  and  feelings  of  a  prophet  with  such  a  point  of 
view.  The  overthrow  of  Nineveh  not  only  brought  to 
Nahum  and  those  of  like  mind  satisfaction  of  the  natural, 
human  desire  for  vengeance,  but  it  also  enabled  them  to 
justify  the  ways  of  God  to  men.  Such  objective  dem- 


104 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


onstration  of  the  justice  of  Yahweh  was  essential  to  the 
validity  of  their  theology.  By  such  vindication  of 
Yahweh  and  his  people,  faith  in  Yahweh  was  made 
possible  for  them.  Hence,  the  joy  of  Nahum  is  not  only 
and  merely  exultation  over  a  fallen  foe,  it  is  also  the 
glad  cry  of  an  assured  faith  in  the  God  of  the  fathers.1 

Jeremiah  throughout  his  lifetime  was  at  loggerheads 
with  his  generation  over  the  proper  attitude  to  assume 
toward  the  dominant  world-power.  The  people  of 
Judah  were  liberty-loving  mountaineers.  They  groaned 
under  the  foreign  yoke,  and  they  improved  every  oppor¬ 
tunity  to  strike  a  blow  for  freedom.  This  seemed  to 
them  to  be  not  only  the  part  of  true  patriots,  but  also 
that  of  loyal  servants  of  Yahweh.  It  could  not  be  the 
will  of  Yahweh  that  they  should  supinely  submit  to  the 
rule  of  idolaters,  denying  and  defying  the  authority  of 
the  true  God.  To  people  holding  such  views  the  utter¬ 
ances  of  Jeremiah  seemed  in  the  highest  degree  unpatri¬ 
otic,  disloyal,  and  irreligious;  for  Jeremiah  from  first  to 
last  counseled  non-resistance  and  a  full  acceptance  of 
the  sway  of  Babylon.  Even  after  the  contest  was  openly 
joined  and  the  Babylonian  army  was  on  the  soil  of  Judah, 
Jeremiah  persisted  in  urging  upon  his  countrymen  the 
necessity  of  surrendering  to  the  Babylonian.  We  who 
have  just  come  through  a  great  war  and  remember 
keenly  how  the  pacifist  and  pro- German  were  regarded 
jpd  treated  by  public  sentiment  and  official  procedure 
can  easily  understand  that  Jeremiah’s  advice  to  the 
men  of  Jerusalem  to  desert  to  the  enemy  and  give  up 

1 J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  A  Critical  and  Exegetical  Commentary  on  the 
Books  of  Micah,  Zephaniah  and  Nahum  ( International  Critical  Commen¬ 
tary)  (New  York:  Scribners,  1911),  pp.  281  f. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  105 


the  struggle  was  bitterly  resented  by  the  leaders  of  the 
gallant  but  futile  struggle  for  freedom.  The  wonder  is, 
not  that  Jeremiah  was  arrested  as  a  deserter  and 
imprisoned,  but  that  he  was  not  put  to  death.  But 
Jeremiah  was  convinced  that  Judah  was  so  sunk  in 
iniquity  that  Yahweh  could  do  nothing  less  than  send 
the  nation  into  exile.  He  saw  that  Babylonia  was 
indubitably  the  mistress  of  the  world  and  he  explained 
it  as  due  to  the  will  of  Yahweh,  who  was  using  Babylon, 
even  as  he  had  used  Assyria,  as  the  rod  of  his  punitive 
wrath.  At  the  outset  of  his  ministry,  like  Zephaniah, 
he  had  assigned  this  function  of  punishing  the  wicked 
world  to  the  Scythians.  But  they  had  failed  him  and 
he  apparently  retired  into  seclusion  until  the  Babylonian 
Kingdom  came  to  the  fore  and  furnished  him  with  the 
instrument  of  wrath  which  he  saw  that  his  people  needed. 

55.  The  message  of  Habakkuk. — The  most  significant 
contribution  to  thought  during  this  period  upon  the 
subject  of  Israel’s  subjection  to  foreign  powers  was  made 
by  Habakkuk.  The  common  thought  of  the  day  attrib¬ 
uted  all  of  Judah’s  misfortune  to  the  sins  of  Manasseh 
and  his  generation  (II  Kangs  23:26;  24:3).  Jeremiah 
saw  that  such  an  interpretation  was  paralyzing  all 
aspiration  and  effort  toward  better  things,  for  few  men 
of  any  age  would  keep  themselves  firmly  loyal  to  their 
ideals  if  they  became  convinced  that  they  and  their 
generation  were  doomed  to  suffer  irremediable  disaster 
because  of  the  sins  of  a  former  generation.  Jeremiah, 
therefore,  never  wearied  of  driving  home  the  message 
that  his  contemporaries  need  look  no  farther  back  than 
their  own  times  to  discover  justification  for  all  that  they 
were  suffering.  Their  own  wickedness  was  so  great  that 


io6 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


national  overthrow  was  inevitable.  But  this  did  not 
wholly  satisfy  the  mind  of  Habakkuk.  He  protests  to 
Yahweh  that  the  land  is  given  over  into  the  hand  of  the 
wicked  and  that  Yahweh  seems  deaf  to  the  cry  of  his 
children  (1:2-4).  The  wicked  oppressors  of  whom  he 
complains  seem  most  naturally  to  be  the  rich  and  power¬ 
ful  among  his  own  countrymen.  To  this  cry  Yahweh 
replies  that  he  is  about  to  raise  up  the  Chaldeans  to 
punish  these  wicked  oppressors  (1:5).  But  this  answer 
does  not  commend  itself  to  Habakkuk,  for  he  realizes 
that  the  wickedness  of  the  Chaldean  makes  that  of  Judah 
pale  into  insignificance  beside  it.  He  pushes  his  problem 
further,  therefore,  and  demands  how  a  just  God,  such  as 
Yahweh  is,  can  tolerate  the  unceasing  oppression  and 
exploitation  of  his  own  people  by  a  foreign  people  that 
is  indescribably  more  wicked  (1 : 12-17).  To  this  further 
question  Yahweh  makes  an  answer  that  finds  its  climax 
in  the  well-known  verse: 

Behold,  his  soul  is  puffed  up,  it  is  not  upright  in  him 

But  the  righteous  shall  live  by  his  faithfulness  [2:4]. 

This  answer,  being  interpreted,  is  to  the  effect  that 
the  Chaldean  (i.e.,  the  neo-Babylonian)  power  is  essen¬ 
tially  weak  and  will  therefore  fall,  not  having  that  moral 
sincerity  and  simplicity  of  soul  that  guarantee  perma¬ 
nence;  but  that  the  people  of  Judah,  being  righteous 
and  in  so  far  as  they  are  righteous,  will  persist  and  flourish 
by  reason  of  their  steadfastness.  The  word  commonly 
rendered  “ faith”  here  is  rather  “ faithfulness,”  “ trust¬ 
worthiness”;  it  almost  amounts  to  integrity.1 

At  first  thought  we  might  say  that  Habakkuk  made 
no  contribution  to  Hebrew  thought  upon  the  problem 

1  For  different  interpretations  of  Hab.  1:2-11,  cf.  Nowack,  Marti, 
Stonehouse,  et  al. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  107 


of  life.  Does  he  not  merely  repeat  what  all  his  prede¬ 
cessors  have  said,  viz.,  that  piety  insures  prosperity 
and  that  sin  spells  disaster?  But  that  would  be  to 
fail  in  recognizing  the  full  value  of  Habakkuk’s  message. 
In  the  first  place,  Habakkuk’s  insistence  upon  thinking 
his  problem  through  shows  that  a  prophet  did  not 
necessarily  conceive  of  himself  as  abandoning  his  right 
to  think  for  himself  when  he  became  a  spokesman  of 
Yahweh.  Nor  did  he  regard  himself  as  under  bonds  to 
accept  the  interpretations  of  experience  that  had  been 
handed  down  from  the  past,  even  though  they  bore  the 
seal  of  prophetic  authority.  He  claimed  the  right  to 
ask  questions  and  to  receive  answers  that  would  satisfy 
the  demands  of  his  intelligence.  That  Habakkuk  should 
have  established  the  right  to  freedom  of  thought  in  the 
field  of  ethics  and  religion,  and  that  his  thoughtful 
inquiry  should  have  so  commended  itself  to  the  Jewish 
mind  as  to  have  been  finally  granted  a  place  in  the 
Canon  of  Scripture,  is  no  mean  praise  for  an  otherwise 
unknown  prophet.  Further,  Habakkuk’s  enunciation 
of  the  theory  that  piety  pays  in  the  long  run  was  not 
merely  a  repetition  of  the  teaching  of  previous  prophets. 
At  least,  he  did  not  repeat  it  just  because  it  was  the 
custom  to  hold  such  a  view.  His  declaration  of  this 
teaching  rested  upon  the  basis  of  his  own  experience. 
He  had  thought  and  prayed  the  thing  through  for  him¬ 
self.  It  was  his  own  conviction  and  not  merely  a  part 
of  his  mental  and  moral  heritage.  Moreover,  he  based 
this  teaching  not  only  upon  the  divine  dictum,  but  also 
upon  the  nature  of  things.  It  was  his  conviction  that 
the  false,  the  shallow,  the  morally  perverse  carried  within 
itself  the  seeds  of  its  own  ruin;  whereas  righteousness 


io8 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


was  in  accordance  with  the  fundamental  nature  of  things 
and  must  therefore  win  through  to  vindication.  Thus 
Habakkuk’s  philosophy  of  life,  though  it  was  in  its  out¬ 
come  essentially  the  same  as  that  of  his  fathers,  was  in  the 
first  place  his  very  own  achievement;  he  gained  it  for  him¬ 
self  by  the  sweat  of  his  soul;  it  was  no  conventional  or  con¬ 
suetudinary  religion  or  morals;  it  was  his  own  personal 
discovery.  In  the  second  place,  it  was  not  conceived 
of  by  him  merely  as  a  gift  from  God  which  had  been 
passively  received  by  him,  but  was  rather  something 
that  had  come  to  him  or  rather  sprung  up  in  him  as  the 
product  of  his  own  agonizing  thought  upon  the  condi¬ 
tions  of  his  day;  it  was  a  thing  approved  both  by  his 
reason  and  his  conscience. 

The  remainder  of  the  original  prophecy  of  Habakkuk 
(2:5-11,  15-17)  consists  of  a  series  of  woes  upon  the 
oppressive  world-ruler.1  The  abuse  of  his  power  through 
his  pride  and  greed  in  robbery,  murder,  treachery,  and 
violence  of  every  sort  will  react  upon  the  oppressor 
himself.  Yahweh  is  the  director  of  the  moral  universe 
and  right  will  avenge  itself  upon  the  head  of  the  world- 
tyrant.  It  is  especially  noteworthy  that  nowhere  in  these 
woes  is  there  any  citation  of  a  wrong  against  Jews  as 
such,  but  rather  that  the  tyrant  is  condemned  and 
threatened  for  his  violation  of  fundamental  human  rights 
and  principles.  Of  course,  the  animus  of  the  writer 
against  this  oppressor  is  aroused  by  the  fact  that  the 
Jewish  people  have  endured  much  at  the  tyrant’s  hands, 
but  the  note  of  personal  or  national  vengeance  is  sub¬ 
merged  in  the  chorus  of  protest  against  the  tyrant’s  ruth¬ 
less  disregard  of  considerations  of  humanity  as  a  whole. 

rFor  the  text  of  2:5,  cf.  the  commentaries  cited  onp.  106. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  109 


56.  Moral  character  of  Y ahweh. — When  we  turn  to 
our  seventh-century  sources  for  consideration  of  their 
moral  standards  in  general,  we  find  no  lack  of  materials. 
The  approaching  downfall  of  Judah  furnished  the  prophets 
with  an  inexhaustible  theme.  The  sorrows  and  sufferings 
of  Judah  have  been  brought  on  by  the  sins  of  Judah,  and 
in  the  catalogues  of  sin  violations  of  the  moral  law  are 
constantly  enumerated.  But  before  taking  up  the 
prophetic  estimate  of  the  moral  standards,  achievements, 
and  failures  of  Judah,  we  must  see  what  was  the  seventh 
century’s  conception  of  the  moral  character  of  Yahweh, 
in  so  far  as  it  is  indicated  in  the  writings  from  that  age. 

We  naturally  learn  that  “  Yahweh  is  righteous 
within  her  [i.e.,  Jerusalem];  he  will  not  do  wrong; 
morning  by  morning  he  establishes  his  justice;  light 
fails  not”  (Zeph.  3:5).  That  is  to  say,  Yahweh  acts 
with  the  same  unfailing  regularity  in  the  moral  order 
of  the  world  as  in  the  order  of  the  physical  universe.1 
He  punishes  sin,  even  in  the  persons  of  the  descendants 
of  the  actual  offenders,  and  he  will  by  no  means  clear 
the  guilty  (Num.  14:18;  Nah.  1:2,  3).  He  is  the  judge 
of  the  moral  order  and  distributes  his  rewards  and 
punishments  according  to  the  deserts  of  men,  being  able 
as  God  to  read  the  secrets  of  men’s  hearts  and  to 
penetrate  all  deceptive  disguises  (Jer.  17:9,  10).  His 
wrath  against  sin  is  fearfully  destructive,  stopping 
not  at  the  destruction  of  the  human  race  (with  the 
exception  of  Noah  and  his  family)  and  venting  itself 
even  upon  inanimate  nature  (Gen.  6:5-8;  7:4,  22  f. ; 
Nah.  1:6).  He  is  jealous  of  his  own  exclusive  rights 
and  privileges  and  resents  encroachment  thereon,  either 

1  See  my  Commentary  on  Zephaniah  {ICC),  in  loc. 


no 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


by  men  (Gen.  3:22-24)  or  by  rival  gods  (Exod.  32:7- 
10).  But  he  is  not  implacable  (Jer.  3:12;  Nah.  9:24). 
He  is  sorry  that  he  sent  a  flood  upon  mankind  when 
he  smells  the  odor  of  the  burnt-offering  made  by  Noah 
(Gen.  8:21  f.)  and  he  “repents”  of  the  evil  that  he 
had  rashly  purposed  against  Israel  when  Moses  reasons 
with  him  in  pleading  for  his  people  (Exod.  32:7-14). 
Indeed,  he  predicts  disaster  through  his  prophets  pri¬ 
marily  in  order  that  the  people  may  be  turned  from 
the  error  of  their  ways  and  so  escape  destruction  (Jer. 
18:6-10).  The  approach  to  his  favor  is  not  by  the 
sacrificial  or  ritualistic  route,  but  rather  by  the  way  of 
obedience  to  his  precepts  as  expounded  by  the  prophets 
(Jer.  6:20;  7:21-26).  The  general  nature  of  these  is 
suggested  by  the  characterization  of  Yahweh  given  in 
Exodus  34:6,  7 : 

Yahweh  is  a  merciful  and  gracious  God, 

Slow  to  anger  and  plenteous  in  loving-kindness  and  truth; 
Keeping  loving-kindness  for  thousands, 

Forgiving  iniquity  and  transgression  and  sin; 

But  he  will  by  no  means  clear  the  guilty, 

Visiting  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children 
And  upon  the  children’s  children,  upon  the  third  and  the 
fourth  generations. 

And  again  in  Jeremiah  9:23  f.: 

Let  not  the  wise  man  glory  in  his  wisdom; 

Neither  let  the  mighty  man  glory  in  his  strength; 

Let  not  the  rich  man  glory  in  his  riches. 

But  let  him  that  would  glory  glory  in  this, 

That  he  understands  and  knows  me, 

That  I  am  Yahweh  who  exercises  mercy, 

Justice  and  righteousness  in  the  earth; 

For  in  these  things  I  delight, 

Says  Yahweh. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  in 


See  also  Numbers  14:18. 

In  surveying  this  sketch  of  the  moral  aspects  of  the 
divine  nature,  we  see  at  once  that,  as  has  been  suggested 
before  (pp.  7,  30),  the  God-idea  reflects  the  achievements 
and  limitations  of  the  human  personality.  This  is  in 
some  respects  a  very  humanized  God.  Even  as  the  men 
of  the  seventh  century  had  not  become  completely 
ethicized,  so  their  God-concept  was  not  as  yet  lifted  to  a 
consistently  ethical  plane.  But  the  ethical  elements  are 
the  dominant  ones  so  far  as  Yahweh’s  relations  with  men 
are  principally  concerned,  and  the  influence  of  the  worship 
of  such  a  God  could  not  but  make  for  moral  betterment 
and  the  enrichment  of  individual  and  social  life. 

57.  Social  ideals. — From  the  standpoint  of  the 
prophets,  the  social  morality  of  the  seventh  century  was 
at  low  ebb.  Habakkuk,  speaking  of  conditions  at  the 
end  of  the  century,  says: 

How  long,  O  Yahweh,  have  I  cried,  and  thou  dost  not 
hear? 

I  cry  out  unto  thee  of  violence  and  thou  dost  not  deliver. 

Wherefore  dost  thou  show  me  iniquity  and  dost  thou  look 
upon  wickedness  ? 

And  devastation  and  violence  are  before  me,  and  there  is 
strife,  and  contention  lifts  up  [its  voice]. 

Therefore  law  is  relaxed  and  judgment  never  goes  forth. 

For  the  wicked  circumvents  the  righteous;  and  so  judg¬ 
ment  goes  forth  distorted  [Hab.  1 : 2-4]. 

Zephaniah  at  an  earlier  period  speaks  in  similar  tones  of 
condemnation : 

I  will  punish  the  princes  and  the  king’s  sons, 

Who  fill  their  master’s  house  with  violence  and  deceit. 

And  I  will  punish  every  one  who  leaps  over  the  threshold, 

And  every  one  who  clothes  himself  with  foreign  raiment 
[1:8,  9]. 


1 1 2 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


And  again: 

Her  princes  within  her  are  roaring  lions. 

Her  judges  are  evening  wolves;  they  have  left  nothing  till 
the  morning. 

Her  prophets  are  reckless  men  of  treachery. 

Her  priests  have  profaned  the  holy;  they  have  done  vio¬ 
lence  to  law  [3:3,  4]. 

A  similar  condemnation  of  the  prophets  is  frequently 
on  Jeremiah’s  lips  (5:31;  6:14;  29:23).  Taking  a 

totally  different  attitude  from  theirs  toward  the  great 
problems  and  policies  of  the  day,  he  does  not  hesitate  to 
make  them  out  to  be  liars,  deceivers,  self-seekers,  and 
adulterers.  They  and  the  priests,  the  two  classes  officially 
responsible  for  the  right  interpretation  of  the  will  of 
Yahweh  and  the  proper  administration  of  his  law,  are 
charged  by  Jeremiah  with  being  in  an  evil  partnership 
for  the  purpose  of  ruling  Judah  according  to  their  own 
evil  purposes  (5:31).  Things  have  gone  so  far  that  the 
priests  even  dare  to  introduce  into  the  temple-ritual 
practices  alien  to  Yahweh-worship,  and  the  official 
scribes  have  produced  a  perverted  version  of  the  ancient 
law  of  Yahweh  (Jer.  7 : 31;  8:8;  19:5;  cf.  Ezek.  20: 25). 1 

With  the  religious  and  moral  leadership  of  Judah  in 
such  unscrupulous  hands,  it  is  only  to  be  expected  that 
the  conduct  of  the  common  people  and  rulers  would  be 
cut  on  the  same  pattern.  Josiah’s  reform  found  human 
sacrifice  being  practiced  in  honor  of  Molech2  and  did 

1  Jeremiah’s  attitude  toward  the  Deuteronomic  reform  is  not  clear; 
it  may  be  that  in  8 : 8  he  was  casting  reflections  upon  the  new  edition  of 
the  law  promulgated  in  connection  with  Josiah’s  reform. 

2  Probably  this  name  was  purposely  changed  from  Melek  ( =  king) 
in  order  to  suggest  the  word  bosheth  (  =  shame),  even  as  Meribbaal  was 
later  changed  into  Mephibosheth  (II  Sam.  4:4;  cf.  I  Chron.  8:34;  9:40)- 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  113 


away  with  it  (II  Kings  23:10).  It  need  hardly  be 
pointed  out  that  the  practice  of  human  sacrifice,  at  least 
when  the  victims  are  the  children  of  the  sacrificers, 
forever  silences  the  charge  that  these  people  took  their 
religion  lightly,  that  it  merely  was  a  mechanical  routine 
of  ritual.  The  ancient  Hebrews  loved  their  children  in 
a  perfectly  normal  way1  and  no  more  trying  test  of 
sincerity  in  religious  zeal  could  be  imposed  than  the 
demand  to  offer  a  child  as  a  burnt  offering.  On  the  other 
hand,  such  a  custom  testifies  to  a  total  disregard  of  the 
right  of  every  person  to  “life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of 
happiness.”  It  sacrifices  the  individual  in  behalf  of  the 
social  welfare,  regardless  of  the  individual’s  willingness 
to  be  so  utilized.  With  such  crude  conceptions  of  the 
rights  of  personality  current  among  the  people  and  with 
such  crass  conceptions  of  the  will  of  God,  it  is  natural  to 
find  the  prophets  passing  damnatory  judgment  upon 
their  generation.  Jeremiah  even  declares  them  to  be 
beyond  hope: 

And  if  thou  say  in  thy  heart : 

“Wherefore  have  these  things  befallen  me?” 

Because  of  the  greatness  of  thine  iniquity  are  thy  skirts 
uncovered, 

And  thy  heels  suffer  violence. 

Can  the  Ethiopian  change  his  skin, 

Or  the  leopard  his  spots  ? 

Then  may  ye  also  do  good 

That  are  wont  to  do  evil  [Jer.  13:22,  23]. 

In  dramatic  fashion,  Jeremiah  maintains  that  there 
is  not  a  single  righteous  man  in  Jerusalem;  rich  and 
poor,  high  and  low,  all  alike  have  broken  away  from  the 

1  Witness  David’s  grief  over  Bathsheba’s  son,  and  again  over  the 
death  of  Absalom,  ungrateful  as  the  latter  was. 


1 14  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

restraints  of  righteousness  (Jer.  5:1  ff.).  As  a  convin¬ 
cing  proof  of  the  religious  and  moral  degradation  of  the 
people,  Jeremiah  cites  the  fact  that  widows  and  father¬ 
less  children  have  no  defenders,  but  are  made  the  prey 
of  the  ravenous  greed  of  the  day  (Jer.  5:28;  22:3;  cf. 
Exod.  22 : 21  ff.). 

58.  Slavery. — Another  wrong  that  kindled  Jeremiah’s 
wrath  was  the  treatment  accorded  slaves  in  his  day. 
When  the  Babylonian  army  was  pressing  hard  upon 
Jerusalem,  the  leaders  of  the  city  declared  all  slaves  free.^ 
This  was  probably,  like  most  human  actions,  done  from 
mixed  motives.  There  may  have  been  a  hope  that  this 
would  placate  the  angry  Yahweh  and  lead  him  to  fight 
for  Judah  against  her  foes.  There  may  also  have  been 
present  the  thought  that  the  defense  of  the  city  would 
be  strengthened,  if  a  body  of  discontented  slaves  were 
converted  into  a  contingent  of  grateful  citizens.  Then, 
too,  the  provisioning  of  the  city  was  daily  becoming 
more  difficult  and  the  slave-owners  may  have  been  glad 
to  have  fewer  mouths  to  feed.  But  whatever  motives 
led  them  to  free  the  slaves,  when  the  Babylonian  army 
was  temporarily  withdrawn  in  order  to  meet  the  advan¬ 
cing  forces  from  Egypt,  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves 
was  immediately  canceled  and  they  were  once  more 
reduced  to  servitude  (Jer.  34:8-22). 

59.  Poor  and  weak. — Though  Jeremiah  and  the 
prophets  in  general  always  took  up  the  cause  of  the  poor 
and  weak,  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  they 
were  uncritical  defenders  of  the  defenseless  or  unapprecia¬ 
tive  of  the  worth  of  those  whom  they  denounced.  As  a 
matter  of  fact  both  Jeremiah  and  his  successor  Ezekiel 
recognized  that  the  future  of  Israel  lay  in  the  hands  of 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  1 1 5 


the  better  classes  in  the  community.  Jeremiah  likens 
the  exiles  and  the  remnant  that  was  left  in  Judah  to 
good  and  bad  figs,  respectively  (chap.  24).  Yet  those  left 
in  Judah  comprised  only  the  poorest  and  weakest  of  the 
population;  all  the  efficient  and  influential  people  had 
been  carried  away  by  Babylon  (II  Kings  24: 14).  And  it 
is  the  exiles  who  for  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  are  the  bearers 
of  the  hope  of  Israel.  The  future  is  theirs.  This  shows 
that  these  prophets  were  not  mere  wild-eyed  idealists 
and  dreamers.  They  were  practical  men  who  reckoned 
with  the  hard  facts  of  experience.  It  was  as  true 
then  as  now  that  the  men  who  carry  a  country  or  a 
people  to  influence  and  power  are  not  those  who  have 
made  a  failure  in  the  struggle  for  existence  and  have 
had  to  be  carried  along  by  the  stronger  elements  in  the 
community.  The  backbone  of  any  social  or  political 
order  is  the  great  company  of  men  and  women  who  make 
some  sort  of  success  in  life  and  have  energy  left,  after 
caring  for  themselves  and  their  dependents,  to  devote 
to  the  interests  of  the  community  as  a  whole.  Without 
such  people  no  society  can  permanently  maintain  itself. 
This  the  prophets  knew  and  sought,  therefore,  to  influ¬ 
ence  these  makers  of  the  state  to  accept  and  be  governed 
by  high  moral  and  spiritual  ideals.  Jeremiah  advises 
yielding  to  the  Babylonians  in  order  to  save  his  people  from 
destruction  and  his  city  from  devastation,  having  his 
eye  upon  the  future  of  his  country  and  seeking  to  conserve 
its  best  elements  for  the  building  of  that  future  (Jer., 
chap.  27).  Such  advice  naturally  brings  him  under 
suspicion  and  at  the  first  opportunity  he  is  cast  into 
prison  on  charges  of  disloyalty  (Jer.,  chap.  38).  He 
held  up  the  Rechabites  in  their  simple  and  loyal  obedi- 


n6 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ence  to  the  wish  of  their  founder  as  an  example  to  his 
countrymen  (35 : 1-11),  and  in  all  probability  commended 
their  simple  nomadic  way  of  living  in  contrast  to  the 
more  complex,  luxuriant,  and  debased  life  of  the  civi¬ 
lization  of  his  day.  His  devotion  to  his  people  was 
genuine  and  unselfish  in  the  highest  degree,  as  attested 
by  his  heartbroken  grief  over  their  waywardness  and 
sin  (9:1;  14:17-21)  and  by  his  voluntary  choice  of 
residence  in  Jerusalem,  when  the  opportunity  to  leave 
his  land  and  become  a  petted  protege  of  the  Babylonian 
Court  was  offered  to  him  (Jer.,  chap.  40). 

60.  Ethical  miscellany. — To  complete  this  socio- 
ethical  sketch  of  the  seventh  century  in  Judah,  we  must 
gather  up  a  few  outlying  social  facts.  The  story  of 
Abraham  pleading  with  Yahweh  for  the  deliverance  of 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah  (Gen.  18:23-33)  demonstrates  the 
acceptance  of  a  view  of  righteousness  as  having  vicarious 
efficiency.  For  the  sake  of  a  few  righteous  men  an  entire 
city  may  be  spared  destruction.  The  feeling  lying  at 
the  heart  of  this  view  is  that  it  is  not  fair  to  destroy  the 
righteous  man  on  account  of  the  sins  of  the  wicked.  It 
is  better  to  let  the  wicked  go  unpunished.  This  is  a 
step  toward  the  recognition  of  individual  worth  and 
individual  responsibility  before  God  and  man  (cf.  Jer. 
5:1,  2).  Later  interpretations  of  the  law  emphasize  the 
humanitarian  character  of  the  Sabbath  as  a  day  of  rest 
for  man  and  beast,  slave  and  free  (Exod.  20:9-11),  and 
prohibit  the  taking  of  interest  upon  loans  to  members 
of  the  Hebrew  community  (Exod.  22:25).  This  is 
evidence  of  a  relatively  simple  economic  fife  and  of  a 
feeling  of  obligation  toward  fellow-Hebrews  as  distin¬ 
guished  from  foreigners.  Zephaniah  looks  forward  to 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  117 


a  time  when  the  ideal  Israel  shall  come  into  being  and 
gives  us  a  picture  of  a  stricken  and  trembling  people  who 
have  learned  obedience  by  the  things  they  have  suffered : 

In  that  day  thou  wilt  not  be  shamed  by  any  of  thy  deeds 
wherein  thou  hast  rebelled  against  me; 

For  then  I  shall  remove  from  the  midst  of  thee  thy 
proudly  exulting  ones, 

And  thou  wilt  no  more  be  haughty  in  my  holy  mountains; 

But  I  shall  leave  in  the  midst  of  thee  a  people  humble  and 
poor, 

And  the  remnant  of  Israel  will  seek  refuge  in  the  name 
of  Yahweh. 

They  will  do  no  wickedness,  nor  will  they  speak  lies, 

Nor  will  there  be  found  in  their  mouth  a  deceitful  tongue, 

For  they  will  feed  and  lie  down  with  none  to  disturb 
them  [Zeph.  3:11-13]. 

61.  Personal  standards. — In  the  foregoing  social 
practices  and  ideals,  there  has,  of  course,  appeared 
much  that  reveals  the  personal  standards  and  attain¬ 
ments  of  the  times  in  the  sphere  of  morals,  for  the  social 
and  the  personal  necessarily  are  closely  related  and  react 
and  interact  one  upon  the  other.  But  some  actions  and 
ideals  more  particularly  personal  remain  to  be  noted. 
It  would  seem  from  the  statements  of  Jeremiah  (5:7  f . ; 
9:2;  29:23)  that  sexual  crime  was  common  in  the  land, 
extending  even  to  the  professional  representatives  of 
religion.  That  there  was  much  reason  for  Jeremiah  to 
denounce  this  abuse  seems  clear  from  the  fact  that  in 
Josiah’s  reform  movement,  one  of  the  outstanding  evils 
to  be  laid  low  was  the  public  practice  of  Sodomy.  Men 
and  women  were  officially  set  apart  for  the  practice  of 
harlotry,  their  chambers  having  been  given  room  in  the 
very  temple  of  Yahweh  itself  (II  Kings  23:7).  This 


n8 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


practice,  probably  originating  among  the  Canaanites 
and  thence  coming  into  Israel,  had  been  in  vogue  in 
Judah  from  an  early  day,  one  editor  at  least  putting  it 
back  as  far  as  the  reign  of  Rehoboam  (I  Kings  14:24; 
cf.  15:12;  22:46).  In  the  light  of  such  practices  it  is 
altogether  likely  that  when  the  prophets  talked  about 
adultery  and  the  like  they  are  to  be  understood  as 
meaning  exactly  what  they  said.  To  be  sure,  at  times 
they  did  use  such  terms  figuratively  of  Israel’s  apostasy 
from  Yahweh,  but  that  figurative  use  is  itself  a  testimony 
to  the  widespread  practice  of  the  thing  itself.  They 
knew  the  meaning  of  the  figure  only  too  well. 

62.  Lying  was  another  widespread  evil  (Jer.  9:2-6). 
Particularly  significant  here  is  the  fact  that  under  some 
circumstances  a  lie  was  deemed  excusable,  if  not  com¬ 
mendable.  This  was,  of  course,  the  persistence  of  an 
old  point  of  view  (see  Gen.  12 : 10-20)  d  But  at  a  critical 
juncture,  Jeremiah  did  not  hesitate  to  adopt  the  sug¬ 
gestion  to  tell  a  lie,  or  at  least  a  half-truth,  in  order  that 
evil  consequences  might  be  avoided.  When  summoned 
to  a  private  interview  by  Zedekiah  and  bidden  by  the 
king  to  report  to  the  princes  that  the  purpose  and  content 
of  the  interview  were  something  other  than  what  they 
were,  Jeremiah  fell  in  with  the  suggestion  and  followed 
the  king’s  behest  (Jer.  38: 14-27).  Jeremiah’s  motive  in 
so  doing  was  scarcely  fear;  he  had  defied  the  public 
desire  too  often  to  be  afraid  for  his  life  now.  Yet  he 
doubtless  reckoned  himself  worth  more  to  his  country 

1  WelLhausen,  followed  by  many  scholars,  would  make  this  passage 
one  of  the  secondary  or  later  elements  in  J;  but  it  is  better  to  follow 
Gunkel  in  regarding  it  as  very  ancient  material  coming  from  another 
strand  of  J:  see  Skinner  (ICC),  in  loc. 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  119 


alive  than  dead.  Further,  he  knew  that  if  he  reported 
the  conversation  as  it  was,  the  king  himself  would  prob¬ 
ably  be  deposed  or  slain.  That  would  mean  the  domi¬ 
nance  of  the  politicians  of  the  court  and  the  removal  of 
the  last  vestige  of  hope  for  the  adoption  of  Jeremiah’s 
policy  wherein  lay  the  only  chance  of  escape  for  his 
country.  What  should  Jeremiah  have  done?  Truth 
for  truth’s  sake  was  not  a  working  principle  in  Jere¬ 
miah’s  day. 

63.  Jeremiah  was  after  all  a  very  natural  human 
being.  He  was  susceptible  to  all  kinds  of  emotion  and 
capable  of  all  that  characterizes  a  man.  He  craved  the 
approval  of  his  fellows;  he  wept  over  their  sins;  he 
longed  for  the  comforts  and  joys  of  a  home  of  his  own, 
though  he  felt  compelled  by  the  exigencies  of  the  times 
to  forego  all  such  satisfactions  (Jer.  16:1  f.);  he  devel¬ 
oped  a  righteous  anger  against  his  foes.  Indeed  the 
vengeful  character  of  his  desires  regarding  them  is 
shocking  to  our  paler  emotions  (Jer.  11:19  ff.;  12:3; 
i5:ioff.;  17:18;  18 : 18  ff. ;  2o:i2).1  At  times  he 

shrank  from  the  burden  of  living  in  such  a  tragic 
period  and  cursed  the  day  of  his  birth  (Jer.  20:14  ff.). 
This  is  anything  but  a  “Christian”  point  of  view.  But 
it  shows  us  the  depths  of  gloom  to  which  Jeremiah’s 
spirits  could  upon  occasion  descend.  It  would  be  unfair 
and  unscientific  to  appraise  Jeremiah’s  estimate  of  the 

1  Such  passages  as  these  are  denied  to  Jeremiah  by  some  interpreters, 
but  the  fact  that  they  express  a  desire  for  revenge  is  no  sufficient  warrant 
for  so  deciding.  Jeremiah  is  not  to  be  judged  by  Christian  standards, 
nor  may  we  decide  as  to  what  he  was  morally  and  spiritually  by  any 
preconceived  estimates.  Jeremiah  was  a  strong,  virile  patriot  and  his 
anger  was  raised  to  white  heat  by  the  evil  machinations  of  his  foes,  not 
only  against  himself  but  also  against  the  public  good. 


120 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


value  of  life  upon  an  utterance  like  this  that  does  but 
reflect  a  passing  mood.  It  is  to  the  everlasting  credit  of 
Jeremiah  that  he  was  able  to  rise  above  this  level  and  live 
a  normal  and  inspiring  life  at  a  period  when  the  situa¬ 
tion  of  his  country  that  he  so  dearly  loved  was  des¬ 
perate  enough  to  warrant  pessimism  of  sombrest  hue. 

Jeremiah  seems  to  have  regarded  Josiah,  at  least 
relatively,  as  the  ideal  type  of  king.  In  rebuking 
Jehoiakim  for  his  love  of  display  and  his  failure  to  pay 
his  workmen  who  erected  his  fine  buildings,  he  bids  him 
consider  Josiah: 

Shalt  thou  reign  because  thou  strivest  to  excel  in  cedar  ? 

Did  not  thy  father  eat  and  drink  and  do  justice  and 
righteousness  ? 

Then  it  was  well  with  him. 

He  judged  the  cause  of  the  poor  and  needy; 

Then  it  was  well. 

Is  not  this  to  know  me?  says  Yahweh  [Jer.  22:15,  16]. 

64.  Everyday  morals. — That  the  common  people  of 
this  century  were  not  wholly  bad,  notwithstanding  the 
charges  brought  against  them  by  the  prophets,  is  shown 
by  the  record  of  the  honesty  and  integrity  of  the  work¬ 
men  engaged  in  the  repairing  of  the  temple  in  621  b.c. 
They  were  intrusted  with  large  sums  of  money  contrib¬ 
uted  by  the  worshipers  for  the  purchase  of  materials 
and  the  payment  of  wages.  “Howbeit,  there  was  no 
reckoning  made  with  them  of  the  money  that  was 
delivered  into  their  hand;  for  they  dealt  faithfully” 
(II  Kings  22:7). 

65.  Utilitarian  morals. — The  morals  of  this  prophetic 
group  are  through  and  through  utilitarian,  showing  no 
appreciable  change  from  the  prophetic  standpoint  of 


PROPHETS  OF  THE  SEVENTH  CENTURY  121 


the  eighth  century  (see  chap.  4).  The  constant  stress 
of  the  prophets  is  upon  the  necessity  of  right  conduct  as 
the  prerequisite  of  success  and  prosperity.  Misfortune 
and  disaster  are  interpreted  as  convincing  evidence  of 
sin.  Yahweh  punishes  wickedness  and  rewards  good¬ 
ness  and  piety.  Jeremiah  says  of  his  contemporaries: 

Neither  say  they  in  their  hearts: 

Let  us  now  fear  Yahweh  our  God, 

That  gives  the  former  rain  and  the  latter  rain  in  due 
season; 

That  keeps  for  us  the  appointed  weeks  of  the  harvest. 

Your  iniquities  have  turned  away  these  things, 

And  your  sins  have  withholden  good  from  you 
[Jer.  5:24,  25]. 

The  motive  urged  to  re-enforce  the  appeal  to  right¬ 
eousness  is  that  this  is  the  royal  road  to  the  divine  favor 
and  to  the  well-being  that  flows  therefrom  (Exod.  15:26; 
20:1 2b;  Zeph.  1:17  f.).  Zephaniah  recognizes  the  fact 
that  the  practical  man  of  his  day  was  a  bit  skeptical 
about  the  direct  relation  between  his  economic  and 
political  welfare  on  the  one  hand  and  the  divine  will  on 
the  other;  and  he  threatens  such  men  with  dire  punish¬ 
ment: 

I  will  punish  those  who  are  at  ease,  thickened  upon  their 
lees; 

Those  who  say  in  their  hearts,  “Yahweh  does  neither 
good  nor  bad”; 

And  their  substance  will  become  a  ruin,  and  their  houses 
a  desolation  [Zeph.  1:12  f.]. 

The  same  point  of  view  is  present  at  the  end  of  the 
century  when  the  Jews  who  fled  to  Egypt  worshiped  the 
“ Queen  of  heaven”  in  defiance  of  the  prophet’s  protest. 
Their  argument  is  that  they  are  but  doing  what  their 


122 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


fathers  did;  and  that  so  long  as  the  “ Queen  of  heaven” 
was  worshiped  things  went  well  with  them,  but  that 
when  they  ceased  worshiping  her  everything  went  wrong 
(Jer.  44:15-19).  Therefore,  they  intend  to  resume  and 
persist  in  her  worship.  Thus  prophets  and  populace 
alike  agree  that  the  aim  of  worship  is  to  secure  results  in 
concrete  physical  well-being;  they  differ  only  as  to  the 
means  whereby  it  may  be  attained.  The  people  argue 
that  Yahweh  ought  to  be  content  with  the  forms  of  wor¬ 
ship  inherited  from  the  fathers  and  the  ethical  practices 
and  principles  of  the  past,  and  finally  forsake  Yahweh 
and  turn  to  other  gods  when  the  desired  prosperity  is 
not  forthcoming  from  him.  The  prophets  explain  the 
lack  of  prosperity  as  due  to  a  failure  to  comply  with  the 
demands  of  Yahweh,  which  are  insistent  upon  the  exercise 
of  justice  and  mercy.  But  neither  prophets  nor  people 
have  yet  any  clear  conception  of  the  value  of  religion  and 
morals  apart  from  the  material  blessings  they  are 
counted  upon  to  bring  to  the  pious. 


CHAPTER  VI 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 

66.  Deuteronomy. — In  this  chapter  we  shall  take  up 
the  ethical  principles  and  motives  of  the  so-called  Deuter- 
onomic  School.  This  term  is  applied  to  the  group  of 
writers  that  produced  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  and 
edited  the  traditions  and  prophecies  extant  in  their  day 
from  the  point  of  view  of  the  Deuteronomic  philosophy 
of  life.  Their  work  will  be  found  in  the  Book  of  Deuter¬ 
onomy,  of  course,  and  in  editorial  elements  now  incorpo¬ 
rated  not  only  in  the  Hexateuch  as  a  whole,  and  in  the 
Books  of  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings,  but  also  in  the 
pre- exilic  prophetic  writings.  The  work  of  this  school 
was  done,  for  the  most  part,  in  the  early  years  of  the 
Exile,  while  Deuteronomy  itself  came  into  existence 
gradually,  beginning  its  development  some  time  between 
Hezekiah  and  Josiah  and  coming  to  completion  during 
the  first  half  of  the  Exile.1  The  Deuteronomic  Code 
(Deut.,  chaps.  12-26  and  28)  represents  the  ideals 
crystallized  into  statutes,  under  which  the  Jews  lived 
for  a  century  and  a  half  or  more  of  the  most  troubled 
period  of  their  history.  Much  of  its  legislation  was 
necessarily  in  abeyance  during  their  absence  from 
Palestine  and  until  the  Temple  was  re-erected  in  516 
B.c.  But  the  Code  was  not  the  less  recognized  as 
furnishing  the  ideal  standard  of  practice  even  though 

1  For  a  careful  study  of  the  origin  of  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy, 
see  Sir  George  Adam  Smith,  The  Book  of  Deuteronomy  (Cambridge 

Bible,  1918). 


123 


124 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


for  the  time  being  it  could  not  be  wholly  realized.  These 
standards,  being  incorporated  in  a  code  of  laws,  are  not 
representative  of  the  most  advanced  thought  of  their 
times,  but  rather  of  the  average  man’s  morality.  As 
was  pointed  out  in  connection  with  the  study  of  the  ethics 
of  the  Covenant  Code  (see  pp.  50  f.),  the  ethics  of  a  code 
of  laws  or  of  individual  statutes  never  comes  from  the 
front  line  of  moral  progress.  Legalized  ethics  is  always 
the  ethics  of  the  average  man — especially  when  the 
laws  in  which  it  is  enshrined  have  to  obtain  the  approval 
of  the  group  as  a  whole,  as  was  the  case  with  the  Deuter- 
onomic  Code.  Of  course,  the  first  eleven  chapters  of 
the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  are  not  statutory  in  character, 
but  homiletic;  and  therefore  were  not  subject  to  the 
same  limitations  in  aspiration  as  the  legal  part  of  the 
book.  But  the  tone  of  these  chapters  is  not  essentially 
different  from  that  of  the  Code  itself.  The  same  ideals 
pervade  the  book,  in  general,  from  beginning  to  end.1 

In  summarizing  the  ethical  principles  and  practices 
of  Deuteronomy,  we  shall  begin  with  the  moral  aspects 
of  the  conception  of  God,  pass  on  to  the  attitude  of  Israel 
toward  people  of  other  nations,  consider  next  the  laws 
dealing  with  the  rights  of  women  and  family  obligations, 
and  follow  these  with  those  regarding  slavery,  treatment 
of  the  poor,  and  the  administration  of  justice.  The 
chapter  will  close  with  a  consideration  of  the  ethical 
motive  stressed  by  the  Deuteronomists  and  of  their 
claim  to  Mosaic  origin  for  this  body  of  law. 

67.  The  conception  of  God. — For  the  ethical  element 
in  the  conception  of  God,  we  might  cite  the  whole  book 

1  For  an  excellent  statement  on  this  matter,  see  Sir  George  Adam 
Smith’s  Deuteronomy  (Cambridge  Bible,  1918),  especially  pp.  xci-xciv. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


125 

of  Deuteronomy,  since  the  scheme  of  the  book  involves 
assigning  all  of  its  contents  to  direct  and  personal 
divine  revelation.  But  for  convenience  of  treatment 
we  shall  confine  our  study  of  the  morals  of  Yahweh  to 
the  materials  relating  directly  to  Yahweh’s  own  attitudes 
and  activities  as  reflected  in  the  records.  The  constant 
presupposition  of  Deuteronomy  is  that  Yahweh  has 
chosen  Israel  as  his  own  people,  and  that  he  naturally 
does  all  in  his  power  to  favor  Israel  and  takes  every 
opportunity  to  injure  Israel’s  foes.  He  gave  the  Hebrews 
the  land  of  Canaan  and  enabled  them  to  take  it  away 
forcibly  from  its  previous  inhabitants  (Deut.  1:20; 
7:6;  26:18,  19).  It  is  his  will  to  set  Israel  high  above 
all  other  peoples  (28: 1).  He  does  this  sort  of  thing  not 
because  of  any  especial  merit  on  the  part  of  the  Hebrews, 
but  on  account  of  the  sins  of  the  Canaanites  (9 : 4-6) . 

This  deprecating  of  any  special  love  for  Israel  on 
Yahweh’s  part  in  giving  Canaan  to  them  is  probably 
motivated  by  a  desire  to  take  away  from  the  Hebrew 
mind  any  occasion  for  undue  self-esteem  and  to  bring  viv¬ 
idly  to  consciousness  the  fact  that  Yahweh  abhors  un¬ 
righteousness,  even  to  the  point  of  exterminating  an 
unrighteous  nation.  Let  Israel  itself  take  heed !  In  pur¬ 
suit  of  this  same  desire  to  keep  Israel  from  being  too  self- 
satisfied,  the  Deuteronomists  inform  Israel  that  Yahweh’s 
love  for  his  people  is  based  not  upon  a  special  worthiness 
on  their  part,  but  upon  his  own  will  so  to  do.  “Yahweh 
did  not  set  his  love  upon  you,  nor  choose  you,  because 
ye  were  more  in  number  than  any  people — for  ye  were 
the  fewest  of  all  peoples — but  because  Yahweh  loved 
you,  and  because  he  would  keep  the  oath  which  he  swore 
with  your  fathers,  etc.”  (Deut.  7:7,  8).  Yahweh  loved 


126 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


you,  because  he  loved  you!  It  is  an  inexplicable  act  of 
divine  grace.  Because  of  that  unreasoned  love,  Yahweh 
will  fight  Israel’s  battles  (Deut.  i :  30) ;  while  on  the  other 
hand,  he  hardened  Sihon’s  heart  that  he  might  destroy 
him  and  his  people  (2:30)  and  he  bade  Israel  destroy 
Heshbon  of  Moab,  man,  woman,  and  child  (2:31-36). 
Similar  destruction  was  sent  by  him  upon  Og  and  the 
people  of  Bashan  (3:1-7).  Intermarriage  with  the 
Canaanites  is  forbidden  and  their  complete  extermination 
decreed  (7:2,  3).  Perpetual  hostility  toward  Ammon 
and  Moab  is  enjoined  (23:3-6),  and  even  the  memory  of 
Amalek  is  to  be  blotted  out  (25:19).  Vengeance  upon 
certain  foes  is  evidently  a  virtue  in  the  eyes  of  Yahweh. 
Nevertheless,  though  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites  are 
to  be  denied  admission  to  the  assembly  of  Yahweh  even 
to  the  tenth  generation,  the  children  of  Edom  may  enter 
said  assembly  in  the  third  generation  (23:8).  This  more 
kindly  attitude  toward  Edom  changed  in  the  course  of 
time  to  a  deadly  hatred  on  the  part  of  Israel  in  response 
to  wrongs  heaped  upon  her  by  Edom.  Yahweh  assures 
Israel  that  this  Deuteronomic  law  which  he  gives  her 
is  far  and  away  the  best  law  in  the  world,  that  no  other 
nation  has  anything  approaching  it  in  righteousness 
(4:8),  even  as  no  other  nation  has  a  God  so  nigh  unto 
them  as  Yahweh  is  to  his  people. 

68.  Israel’s  duty. — These  favors  on  the  part  of 
Yahweh  of  course  involve  certain  obligations  on  the  part 
of  Israel.  She  is  forbidden  the  worship  of  any  other 
God,  on  pain  of  the  loss  of  Yahweh’s  blessing  (13:13- 
18) .  Any  promoter  of  such  worship  must  be  put  to  death 
(13:10).  Yahweh’s  worship  must  be  kept  free  from 
contamination  by  sexual  indulgence  in  any  form  (23 : 18). 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


127 


Vows  made  to  Yahweh  must  be  paid;  it  is  no  sin  not 
to  vow,  but  it  is  unpardonable  not  to  fulfil  a  vow  once 
made  (23:22,  23).  The  penalty  for  displeasing  Yahweh 
might  be  very  severe.  Because  Israel  was  afraid  to 
trust  Yahweh  and  enter  boldly  upon  the  conquest  of 
Palestine  when  the  spies  brought  back  their  report, 
Yahweh  was  wroth  and  swore  a  mighty  oath  in  accord¬ 
ance  with  which  he  kept  Israel  out  of  Canaan  for  a 
whole  generation  (1 :34  ft.).  Not  all  the  pleading  of 
Israel  availed  anything  to  change  the  divine  will 
(1:41-45).  Indeed  Moses  himself  fell  under  the  divine 
wrath  on  account  of  the  sins  of  the  people  (1:37)  and 
was  not  permitted  to  enter  the  promised  land  (3 : 26,  27). 
This  is  vicarious  punishment  that  accomplished  nothing 
in  the  way  of  atonement  for  the  actual  sinners  or  anybody 
else.  But  while  Moses  was  involved  in  the  punishment 
of  Israel,  he  was  nevertheless  able  to  dissuade  Yahweh 
from  his  purpose  to  destroy  Israel  completely  by  appeal¬ 
ing  to  Yahweh’s  pride  (9:i8f.,  25  ff.;  10:10).  In  like 
manner  he  succeeded  in  saving  Aaron  (9 : 20  f.).  Another 
interpretation  of  the  forty  years  in  the  desert  is  given 
in  8:2.  There  it  is  said  that  Yahweh  afflicted  Israel 
thus  in  order  that  he  might  thereby  test  them  and  so 
find  out  whether  or  not  they  would  keep  his  command¬ 
ments.  This  was  a  protracted  examination  of  a  very 
human  kind. 

69.  Family  solidarity. — To  complete  the  Deuter- 
onomic  conception  of  the  ethics  of  Yahweh,  we  cite  one 
more  point  of  view.  In  the  explanatory  material  added 
to  the  second  command  of  the  Decalogue,  Yahweh  is 
described  as  “  visiting  the  iniquities  of  the  fathers  upon 
the  children,  upon  the  third  and  upon  the  fourth  genera- 


128 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


tion  of  them  that  hate  me,  and  shewing  mercy  unto 
thousands  of  them  that  love  me  and  keep  my  command¬ 
ments”  (Exod.  20:5,  6;  Deut.  5:9,  10;  cf.  Exod.  34:7). 
Here  is  the  old  family  solidarity  clearly  recognized. 
The  parent  involves  his  children  and  children’s  children 
in  disaster  by  his  sin,  which  Yahweh  will  and  must 
punish.  But  the  mercy  of  Yahweh  extends  even  further 
than  his  wrath.  “The  intention  of  the  passage  is  thus 
to  teach  that  God’s  mercy  transcends  in  operation  his 
wrath;  in  his  providence  the  beneficent  consequences 
of  a  life  of  goodness  extend  indefinitely  further  than  the 
retribution  which  is  the  penalty  of  persistence  in  sin.”1 
This  thought  is  brought  out  even  more  clearly  in  7 : 9  f., 
where  it  is  supplemented  by  the  statement  that  Yahweh 
visits  the  transgression  of  the  sinner  upon  his  own  person. 
“Know  therefore  that  Yahweh  thy  God — he  is  God, 
the  faithful  God,  who  keeps  covenant  and  mercy  with 
them  that  love  him  and  keep  his  commandments  to  a 
thousand  generations,  and  repays  them  that  hate  him 
to  their  face,  to  destroy  them — he  will  not  be  slack 
to  him  that  hates  him,  he  will  repay  him  to  his  face.” 
In  keeping  with  this  emphasis  upon  the  idea  that  the 
sinner  will  suffer  at  God’s  hand  for  his  sin,  is  the  express 
precept  in  the  Deuteronomic  Code  itself  to  the  same 
effect:  “The  fathers  shall  not  be  put  to  death  for  the 
children,  neither  shall  the  children  be  put  to  death  for 
the  fathers;  every  man  shall  be  put  to  death  for  his  own 
sin”  (24:16).  This  emphasis  upon  individual  responsi- 

1  Driver,  Exodus ,  on  Exod.  20:6.  This  intention  is  brought  out 
more  clearly  by  the  translation  of  the  Jewish  Publication  Society  (1917) 
which  runs:  “Showing  mercy  unto  the  thousandth  generation  of  them 
that  love  me,  etc.”  But  this  rendering  calls  for  a  slight  change  of  text. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


129 


bility  as  over  against  family  and  group  solidarity  is  in 
such  marked  contrast  to  the  spirit  of  the  rest  of  the 
Deuteronomic  Code  that  it  is  most  easily  accounted  for 
as  a  later  element  in  the  Code  inspired  by  the  teaching 
of  Ezekiel  (see  pp.  176  ff.).1 

70.  Attitude  toward  foreigners. — Turning  from  the  con¬ 
sideration  of  the  moral  element  in  the  idea  of  God,  we 
take  up  the  ethical  principles  illustrated  in  the  precepts 
and  statutes  controlling  man’s  relations  with  his  fellows. 
The  attitude  toward  foreigners  is  in  general  that  with 
which  we  have  already  become  familiar.  A  sharp 
distinction  is  made  in  favor  of  the  Hebrew  as  over  against 
the  non-Hebrew.  Foreigners  are  not  granted  any 
benefits  from  the  operation  of  the  law  providing  for  the 
release  from  all  debts  every  seventh  year  (15:2).  The 
carcass  of  an  animal  that  dies  a  natural  death  may  not 
be  eaten  by  a  Hebrew,  but  he  may  give  it  to  a  “  sojourner” 
or  sell  it  to  a  foreigner  (14:21).  No  foreigner  may  be 
chosen  as  King  of  Israel  (17:15).  No  interest  may  be 
charged  upon  loans  to  fellow  Hebrews,  but  upon  loans 
to  foreigners  there  is  no  restriction;  the  Hebrew  may 
charge  them  “all  the  traffic  will  bear.” 

In  war  against  foreign  nations,  Israel’s  treatment  of 
the  foe  is  to  be  determined  by  the  geographical  location 
of  the  enemy.  If  the  foe  is  a  people  very  near  at  hand, 
Israel  must  show  no  mercy  but  inflict  total  destruction 
(2o:i6ff.).  If  the  hostile  people  are  farther  removed 
from  Hebrew  territory,  then  the  treatment  accorded 
them  is  determined  by  their  own  attitude.  If  they  wish 
to  submit  to  Israel,  terms  of  peace  may  be  drawn  up;  but 

1  But  cf.  Sir  George  Adam  Smith  on  Deut.  24: 16  (Cambridge  Bible, 
1918). 


130 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


if  they  are  irreconcilable  and  implacable,  they  must  be 
smitten  by  the  sword  and  all  their  males  slain  (20:  n  ff). 
One  regulation  regarding  war  is  in  striking  contrast  to 
the  course  of  proceedings  followed  by  our  friends,  the 
enemy,  in  the  late  world-war.  Fruit  trees  are  not  to  be 
destroyed;  other  kinds  of  trees  may  be  made  use  of  for 
military  purposes  (20:19). 

71.  The  laws  regarding  women  show  practically  no 
advance  over  those  of  the  Covenant  Code  (see  p.  58). 
However,  in  the  Deuteronomic  edition  of  the  Decalogue, 
the  revised  form  of  the  tenth  commandment  (5:18) 
puts  woman  in  the  first  place  among  the  things  that  may 
not  be  coveted,  whereas  in  Exodus  20:17  she  had  to 
yield  that  position  of  pre-eminence  to  the  house.  Most 
of  the  regulations  regarding  women  deal  with  her  from 
the  point  of  view  of  sex.  The  low  status  of  family  life 
is  seen  in  the  fact  that  the  women  of  a  beaten  and 
destroyed  nation  are  taken  over  and  added  to  the  harems 
of  the  conquering  Hebrews  (21 :  n  ff.).  If  the  conqueror 
be  not  pleased  with  his  slave  wife,  he  is  required  to  give 
her  her  freedom;  he  may  not  sell  her,  nor  treat  her  as  a 
slave  after  he  has  taken  her  to  wife,  because  he  has 
“ humbled  her.”  This  shows  some  appreciation  of  the 
rights  and  dignity  of  human  personality.  In  another 
type  of  case,  however,  there  is  a  strange  bluntness  of 
feeling  revealed.  If  a  man  falsely  accuses  his  young 
wife  of  not  having  guarded  her  virginity  prior  to  her 
marriage,  the  evidence  shall  be  exhibited  to  the  public 
gaze,  and  the  accuser  shall  not  only  be  whipped  and 
forced  to  pay  his  father-in-law  a  hundred  shekels,  but 
he  is  also  compelled  to  live  with  the  accused  wife  as  long 
as  she  lives.  All  the  conditions  for  a  life-long  tragedy 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL  13 1 

are  thus  provided.  If  the  charges  of  the  husband  are 
found  to  be  true,  the  guilty  woman  is  stoned  to  death 
by  the  men  of  her  city  (22:13-21).  If  a  man  be  caught 
in  adultery  with  the  wife  of  another  man,  both  offenders 
are  put  to  death  (22:22).  If  the  woman  be  a  betrothed 
virgin  and  the  offense  be  committed  in  a  city,  both  man 
and  woman  must  die;  but  if  in  the  open  country,  the 
woman  goes  free.  The  supposition  is  that  the  woman 
in  the  country  cried  out  for  help,  but  was  not  heard; 
whereas  in  the  city  she  could  have  made  herself  heard 
if  she  had  wanted  to  do  so  (22:23-27).  If  the  woman 
be  an  unbetrothed  virgin,  no  harm  is  done  that  the  man 
cannot  make  good — he  merely  pays  fifty  shekels  of 
silver  as  dowry  to  the  girl’s  father  and  she  becomes  his 
wife  for  life  (22:28).  Sexual  intercourse  with  a  wife 
of  one’s  father  is  prohibited  in  22:30  and  27:20.  This 
prohibition  is  absolute  and  not  limited  to  the  father’s 
lifetime.  It  is  directed  against  a  practice  that  was 
quite  common  in  early  Israel  in  accordance  with  which 
a  son  inherited  his  father’s  wives  along  with  the  rest 
of  his  father’s  property.  This  is  a  sign  of  a  growing 
consciousness  of  the  rights  of  personality  as  applied  to 
woman  and  it  was  a  step  toward  greater  stability  in 
family  relations.  The  offspring  of  certain  prohibited 
unions  are  denied  admission  to  the  congregation  of 
Yahweh  (23:2),  even  to  the  tenth  generation.1  A 
divorced  wife  who  is  married  to  another  husband  may 
not  be  remarried  to  the  first  husband  after  the  second 
one  has  died  or  has  likewise  divorced  her  (24:1-3). 
The  motive  of  this  regulation  is  not  wholly  clear,  but 

1  The  Hebrew  word  describing  such  children  is  mamzer.  It  occurs 
again  only  in  Zech.  9:6.  Its  meaning  is  wholly  uncertain. 


1 32 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


it  would  certainly  act  as  a  deterrent  upon  easy  divorce 
and  quick  remarriage  and  would  make  for  greater 
permanency  of  the  marriage  relation.  This  was  a  mild 
check  upon  the  husband’s  power,  for  he  seems  to  have 
had  the  initiative  in  matters  of  divorce  and  to  have 
needed  only  to  give  the  wife  a  written  statement  certify¬ 
ing  his  release  of  her  and  she  was  left  to  the  mercies  of 
an  unsympathetic  world.  There  is  no  provision  in  the 
Deuteronomic  law  nor  in  any  other  Hebrew  code  for 
the  divorce  of  a  husband  by  his  wife.  Such  cases  did 
not  arise.  A  woman  without  a  husband  was  without 
visible  means  of  support  and  few  women  would  willingly 
subject  themselves  to  all  that  that  involved.  The  purity 
and  integrity  of  the  family  tie  is  guarded  by  prohibitions 
against  sexual  intercourse  with  a  sister  or  half-sister  or 
one’s  mother-in-law  (27 : 22  f.).  A  newly  married  husband 
is  exempt  for  one  year  after  his  marriage  from  all  military 
service  and  public  responsibility  that  he  may  be  free  to 
“ cheer  his  wife”  (24:5).  An  indelicate  woman  is 
drastically  punished  (25:11  f.).  No  better  proof  that  a 
woman  is  regarded  primarily  as  means  rather  than  as 
an  end  in  herself  can  be  asked  than  that  which  is  furnished 
by  the  law  of  Levirate  marriage  (25:5-10).  .  If  a  man 
dies  without  a  son  his  brother  must  marry  his  widow 
and  the  first  son  of  this  marriage  must  be  regarded  as 
the  dead  brother’s  child.  The  widow  has  no  voice  in 
the  matter;  that  she  will  accept  the  situation  is  taken 
for  granted.  Public  opinion  blackens  the  name  of  a 
brother  who  will  not  do  this  favor  to  the  departed  brother 
(cf.  Gen.,  chap.  38).  In  the  early  days,  this  custom  had 
its  origin  in  ancestor-worship,  the  purpose  of  such  a 
marriage  being  to  provide  the  dead  husband  with  an 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


133 


heir  whose  obligation  it  was  to  perform  the  rites  due  to 
his  supposititious  deceased  parent.  Deuteronomy,  of 
course,  would  not  countenance  such  usage;  but  in  the 
course  of  the  generations  this  old  practice  doubtless 
changed  somewhat  in  significance  and  came  to  be 
associated  more  consciously  with  the  right  of  inheritance 
to  a  deceased  brother’s  estate.1  The  duty  of  a  child  to 
honor  father  and  mother  is  reaffirmed  by  Deuteronomy 
and  a  curse  pronounced  upon  the  one  who  refuses  so  to 
do  (5:16;  27:16). 

It  is  quite  evident  that  woman  as  such  had  few  rights. 
She  was  the  property  of  father,  brother,  or  husband  and 
was  safeguarded  by  such  laws  as  would  conserve  her 
value  as  property.  But  the  law  gives  her  no  recognition 
as  a  citizen  and  little  as  an  independent  personality. 
She  comes  to  expression  and  recognition  in  father, 
brother,  husband,  or  son.  She  is  a  liability  economi¬ 
cally  or  a  commercial  asset,  as  the  case  may  be,  according 
as  she  is  a  marketable  commodity  as  a  potential  bride, 
or  a  capable  worker  as  a  wife  and  mother,  or  worn-out 
and  useless  physically,  merely  a  mouth  to  be  fed  and  a 
body  to  be  housed  and  clothed.  She  is  always  at  the 
mercy  of  other  people  and  prospers  or  otherwise  accord¬ 
ing  as  they  are  kind  and  generous  or  the  reverse.  The 
law  affords  her  little  protection  against  those  who  have 
her  in  their  power.  Her  only  armor  is  her  own  character 
and  the  force  of  public  opinion  which  acts  slowly  and  not 
always  effectively.  It  must  be  remembered,  however, 
that  the  law  as  such  is  always  outrun  in  progress  by  the 
best  public  sentiment  and  we  shall  make  no  mistake  if 
we  assume  that  the  women  of  pre-exilic  Israel  led  fairly 

1  See  I.  Benzinger,  art.  “Marriage,”  Encyclopaedia  Biblica ,  Vol.  III. 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


x34 

happy  lives  and  succeeded  in  obtaining  by  their  own 
merits  much  more  than  the  law  guaranteed  to  them. 

72.  Parents  and  children . — We  may  add  here,  in 
order  to  close  up  the  consideration  of  matters  directly 
pertaining  to  the  family,  two  laws  regarding  children. 
The  first  of  these  (21:15  ff.)  provides  for  the  security  of 
the  rights  of  first-born  sons ;  it  insists  upon  such  a  son’s 
right  to  the  lion’s  share  of  the  inheritance  even  though 
he  be  the  child  of  a  wife  that  is  relegated  to  a  second 
place  or  lower  in  her  husband’s  affections.  No  other 
child  may  be  put  in  the  place  of  the  first-born.  The 
element  of  justice  in  this,  of  course,  granting  the  legiti¬ 
macy  of  a  discrimination  in  favor  of  the  first-born, 
as  universally  recognized  in  that  period,  is  that  the 
first-born  son  is  shielded  against  suffering  the  conse¬ 
quences  of  his  mother’s  misfortune.  The  second  law 
pertaining  to  children  provides  that  when  a  father  and 
mother  unite  in  an  appeal  to  the  elders  against  a  glutton¬ 
ous,  drunken,  stubborn,  or  rebellious  son,  he  shall  be 
stoned  to  death  by  the  men  of  the  city  (21:18-21). 
Such  an  appeal  would,  of  course,  be  forthcoming  only 
in  very  aggravated  cases,  in  view  of  its  serious  conse¬ 
quences.  But  such  a  law  shows  on  the  one  hand  the 
extent  to  which  parental  authority  went,  and  on  the 
other  the  limit  placed  upon  its  exercise  by  public  opin¬ 
ion.  If  death  must  be  inflicted,  it  is  only  in  case  the 
community  indorses  the  penalty  to  the  extent  of  actually 
participating  in  its  infliction. 

73.  Slavery. — The  laws  as  to  slaves  are  few  and  reflect 
little  advance  upon  those  of  the  Covenant  Code  (see 
pp.  56  ff.).  The  seventh  year  manumission  for  Hebrew 
slaves  is  reaffirmed  (15:12  ff.)  and  is  supplemented  by 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


135 


regulations  providing  that  the  owner  shall  furnish  the 
departing  slave  with  a  supply  of  goods  sufficient  to 
sustain  him  a  reasonable  time  until  he  gets  upon  his 
economic  feet.  The  same  privilege  of  release  after  six 
years  of  service  is  now  extended  to  the  woman  slave, 
as  it  was  not  in  the  Covenant  Code.  There  is  no  specifica¬ 
tion  of  conditions  as  to  husband  or  children  in  the  case 
of  the  woman;  she  is  simply  put  upon  the  same  basis 
as  the  man.  Provision  is  made  for  perpetual  slavery 
just  as  in  the  Covenant  Code;  I5:i6f.  (cf.  pp.  56  f.). 
Slaves  are  included  among  those  who  participate  in  the 
jubilation  attending  the  Feast  of  Weeks  and  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles  (16:11-14).  The  stealing  of  Hebrews  and 
selling  them  into  slavery  is  made  a  capital  crime  (24:7), 
just  as  in  the  Covenant  Code  (see  p.  58).  A  fugitive 
slave  law  is  in  the  Code  which  is  in  contrast  to  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  of  the  United  States  before  the 
Civil  War  in  that  it  distinctly  provides  that  in  case  a 
slave  flees  from  his  master  and  takes  refuge  in  Israel 
he  must  not  be  delivered  over  to  his  former  owner 
(23:15,  16).  It  is  quite  clear  from  the  phraseology  of 
this  verse  that  the  slave  here  protected  is  one,  either 
Hebrew  or  foreigner,  who  has  been  in  slavery  among  some 
foreign  people  and  has  sought  refuge  and  freedom  in 
Israel.  Of  course,  pre-exilic  Israel  would  feel  no  obliga¬ 
tion  to  a  foreign  nation  or  individual  in  such  a  case  to 
accommodate  them  by  returning  the  runaway;  but 
it  is  notable  that  the  language  of  the  law  provides  for 
the  welfare  of  the  runaway  by  insisting  that  he  shall 
not  be  oppressed  (23:16).  We  have  already  seen  that 
the  contemporaries  of  Jeremiah  in  Jerusalem  did  not 
live  up  to  the  requirements  of  the  manumission  of  slaves 


136  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


in  the  seventh  year  (p.  114);  so  that  in  this  particular 
case  the  law  was  ahead  of  the  public  sentiment  of  the 
day.  However,  the  days  following  the  reign  of  Josiah 
were  shadowed  by  reaction  in  religion  and  morals  and 
this  disregard  of  the  slave  law  was  part  of  a  general 
moral  relaxation. 

74.  The  poor  and  weak. — It  is  but  a  short  step  between 
slavery  and  poverty;  hence  we  may  naturally  consider 
next  the  laws  designed  to  protect  the  poor  and  weak. 
This  sort  of  legislation  is  one  of  the  outstanding  fea¬ 
tures  of  the  Deuteronomic  Code.  It  greatly  exceeds  in 
quantity  the  similar  legislation  in  the  Covenant  Code 
(pp.  60  f.);  and  it  shows  a  solicitude  and  sympathy  for 
the  needy  that  is  of  the  same  type  as  that  of  the  Cov¬ 
enant  Code,  but  it  is  worked  out  in  more  detail  and  is 
everywhere  present.  Those  who  are  specifically  included 
within  the  scope  of  this  legislation  are  the  stranger,  the 
poor,  the  Levite,  the  fatherless,  and  the  widow.  This 
humanitarian  note  first  appears  in  the  Deuteronomic 
version  of  the  fourth  commandment  of  the  Decalogue 
(5:14!.).  Whereas,  in  Exodus  20,  the  reason  for  the 
observance  of  the  Sabbath  lies  in  the  fact  that  Yahweh 
rested  upon  the  seventh  day  from  all  his  creative  labors, 
so  that  man  should  order  his  scheme  of  work  likewise, 
here  it  is  found  in  the  body’s  necessity  for  rest  and 
particularly  in  the  need  of  rest  upon  the  part  of  man¬ 
servant  and  maidservant.  The  master’s  sensitiveness  to 
this  need  is  quickened  by  a  reference  to  the  slave  life  of 
Israel  in  Egypt  in  the  early  days.  In  similar  fashion,  Israel 
is  urged  to  “love”  the  “stranger,”1  whom  Yahweh  loves 

1  The  term  “stranger”  is  used  in  a  technical  sense  to  designate 
non-Israelites  who  have  come  under  the  protection  of  Israel,  and  are 
dependent  upon  her  for  their  existence. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


137 


and  provides  with  food  and  raiment,  remembering  that 
they  were  “ strangers”  in  Egypt  (10:17-19).  Special 
attention  is  called  to  the  need  of  the  Levite  who  has  no 
property  and  is  dependent  upon  the  generosity  of  the 
worshipers  (12:12,  19;  14:27).  He  shares  in  the  tri¬ 

ennial  tithe  with  the  stranger,  the  fatherless,  and  the 
widow  (14:29;  26:12,  13). 

75.  Release  of  debts. — One  of  the  laws  most  character¬ 
istic  of  the  Deuteronomic  spirit  is  that  which  pertains 
to  the  remission  of  debts  every  seventh  year  (15:1-11). 
The  year  of  release  is  to  be  definitely  fixed  and  to  be 
the  same  all  over  the  land.  Well-to-do  Hebrews  are 
bidden  to  loan  freely  to  their  needy  brethren  and  to 
charge  no  interest  upon  such  loans.  Foreigners  may  be 
required  to  pay  in  terest,  but  not  Hebrews  (see  also  23 : 20). 
If  the  needy  Hebrew  has  been  unable  to  repay  the  loan 
by  the  time  the  seventh  year  comes  around,  the  creditor 
must  wipe  the  slate  clean  that  the  debtor  may  have  a 
new  start  unhampered  by  clinging  debts.  If  the  year 
of  release  is  close  at  hand,  the  good  Hebrew  is  charged 
not  to  allow  that  fact  to  affect  his  willingness  to  lend  to 
his  brother  in  need.  This  is  making  heavy  demands 
again  upon  human  nature.  The  lawmaker  realizes  this 
and  hastens  to  say,  first,  that  there  will  be  no  poor  in 
Israel,  if  the  people  will  but  obey  the  laws  of  Yahweh. 
This,  however,  he  recognizes  as  a  state  of  society  that 
does  not  yet  exist  and  so,  coming  down  to  hard  facts, 
he  declares  that  “the  poor  will  never  cease  out  of  the 
land”  and  encourages  Israel  to  take  up  this  apparently 
unprofitable  business  of  making  loans  that  will  probably 
not  be  repaid  by  assuring  her  that  this  is  the  key  to  the 
divine  favor.  Religion  is  here  brought  in  to  re-enforce 


138  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ethics  in  a  very  direct  way.  This  same  concern  for  the 
poor  is  seen  in  the  prohibition  against  taking  the  poor 
man’s  mill  or  upper  millstone  as  a  pledge  for  the  repay¬ 
ment  of  a  loan;  it  is  his  “life”  (24:6).  Without  it, 
the  daily  food  for  the  family  table  could  not  be  prepared. 
Nor  may  a  widow’s  garment  be  taken  in  pledge  (24:17) ; 
and  the  law  of  the  Covenant  Code  requiring  the  return 
of  the  poor  man’s  pledged  garment  every  night  that  he 
may  be  warm  while  he  sleeps  is  reaffirmed.  A  bit  of 
delicate  consideration  for  the  poor  family’s  feelings  is 
evinced  in  the  regulation  that  the  creditor  shall  not  follow 
the  debtor  into  his  home  to  obtain  the  pledge,  but  shall 
wait  outside  while  the  pledge  is  found  and  brought  out 
to  him  (24:10-13).  A  similar  appreciation  of  the 
necessities  and  feelings  of  the  poor  is  manifested  in  the 
law  requiring  masters  to  pay  their  servant’s  wages  at 
the  close  of  each  day’s  service  (24:14  f.);  in  this  matter 
Hebrew  and  “stranger”  must  be  treated  alike.  Nor 
may  a  poor  man  or  woman  be  unjustly  treated  in  court; 
the  “stranger,”  fatherless,  and  widow  are  to  receive  their 
full  rights  before  the  law  and  not  to  be  denied  them  in 
favor  of  the  more  powerful  and  rich  (24:17  f.;  27:19). 
A  curse  is  pronounced  upon  him  who  wilfully  misleads 
the  blind  (27:18).  The  farmer  is  instructed  not  to 
return  to  pick  up  a  forgotten  sheaf  of  grain,  but  to  leave 
it  for  the  “stranger,”  the  fatherless,  and  the  widow 
(24:19).  In  the  interest  of  the  welfare  of  the  same 
needy  group,  the  olive  tree  must  not  be  too  thoroughly 
beaten,  nor  the  vineyard  carefully  gleaned  (24:20,  21). 

76.  Exercise  of  justice. — Closely  related  to  this  care 
for  the  poor  is  the  emphasis  laid  upon  the  duty  of 
exercising  justice.  Justice  is  always  primarily  the 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


139 


protector  of  the  weak  from  oppression  and  robbery  at 
the  hands  of  the  strong.  This  appears  in  the  first 
reference  to  justice  in  Deuteronomy  (1:16,  17);  the 
Hebrew  judges  should  be  just,  having  no  respect  of 
persons,  but  treating  all  classes  impartially  and  fearing 
nobody,  remembering  always  that  in  the  last  analysis 
the  judgment  is  God’s.  Yahweh  himself  is  the  just 
judge  par  excellence;  “he  regards  not  persons,  takes  no 
reward  [i.e.,  a  bribe],  and  executes  justice”  (10:17  f.). 
This  absolute  freedom  from  favoritism  on  the  part  of 
the  judges  is  insisted  upon  (16:18-20).  If  any  case 
is  too  difficult  for  the  regular  judges,  it  should  be  referred 
to  the  priests,  who  as  representatives  of  Yahweh,  the 
supreme  judge,  constitute  a  court  of  last  resort;  they 
obtain  the  final  decision  directly  from  Yahweh  by 
consultation  of  the  oracle  (17:8-13).  The  general 
principle  in  accordance  with  which  justice  is  to  be  exer¬ 
cised  is  that  of  the  lex  talionis ,  “life  for  life,  eye  for  eye, 
tooth  for  tooth,  hand  for  hand,  foot  for  foot”  (19:21). 
In  an  age  when  a  general  standardization  of  weights 
and  measures  was  unknown,  the  temptation  to  cheat 
was  ever  present;  consequently  all  that  juggle  with 
their  weights  and  measures  are  declared  to  be  an  abomi¬ 
nation  unto  Yahweh  (25:13-16).  In  a  case  involving 
capital  punishment,  great  care  is  taken  to  insure  the 
accused  against  false  testimony;  only  if  two  or  more 
witnesses  testify  to  his  guilt  may  he  be  put  to  death; 
and  that  the  witnesses  may  not  take  their  responsibility 
lightly,  it  is  provided  that  the  witnesses  themselves  shall 
cast  the  first  stones  (17: 2-7 ;  cf .  13 : 9, 10) .  This  is  in  ac¬ 
cord  with  the  ninth  command  of  the  Decalogue  (5:20; 
Exod.  20:16).  Each  city  is  made  responsible  for  the  pres- 


140 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ervation  of  law  and  order  in  the  immediately  contiguous 
territory  to  a  certain  extent.  If  a  man  be  found  slain 
in  the  open  country,  expiation  of  the  crime  through 
the  killing  of  a  heifer  that  has  not  been  broken  in  to 
work  must  be  made  by  the  elders  of  that  city  which  was 
nearest  to  the  spot  where  the  murdered  man  lay  (21 : 1-9). 
There  is  nothing  essentially  new  in  this  law,  nor  is  there 
any  strictly  moral  attitude  reflected,  except  in  the 
provision  that  the  nearest  town  is  responsible.  It  is 
an  old  ceremony,  probably  connected  with  the  fear  of 
wandering  spirits,  and  the  principle  of  community 
responsibility  for  such  things  was  of  widespread  accept¬ 
ance.1  Murder  is,  of  course,  still  prohibited  (5:17), 
and  two  special  types  are  especially  mentioned,  viz., 
secret  murder  (27 : 24)  and  the  hiring  of  assassins  (27 : 25). 
A  distinction  is  recognized  between  accidental  homicide 
or  killing  in  self-defense,  and  deliberate  murder,  in  that 
cities  of  refuge  are  provided  to  which  the  slayer  may  flee 
and  where  he  may  find  refuge  from  the  blood-avenger, 
in  case  he  is  not  a  deliberate  murderer.  This  is  a  special 
endeavor  to  mitigate  the  law  of  blood-revenge  and  shows 
how  implacable  that  law  was,  for  the  innocent  slayer 
is  safe  only  so  long  as  he  stays  within  his  asylum,  thus 
being  kept  indefinitely  from  his  home  and  business 
(4:41-43;  19:3-13).  If  a  man’s  house  lacks  a  parapet 
around  the  roof  and  someone  falls  from  it  and  is  injured 
or  slain,  the  owner  of  the  house  is  held  responsible  and 
comes  under  the  operation  of  the  laws  for  manslaughter, 
personal  injury,  etc.;  hence  it  is  prescribed  that  every 

1  Sir  George  Adam  Smith,  Deuteronomy,  ad  loc.,  calls  attention  to 
parallel  cases  in  the  code  of  Hammurabi  (§§  23,  24);  Ki tab-el- Aghani  IX, 
178,  II.25  ff.;  Doughty,  Arabia  Deserta,  I,  176;  and  in  modem  Palestine. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL  141 

house  shall  have  a  balustrade  around  the  roof  (22:8). 
The  farmer  is  protected  against  the  depredations  of 
robbers  by  a  law  that  forbids  the  taking  of  a  basket  or 
sack  into  a  neighbor’s  vineyard  in  order  to  carry  away 
the  fruit,  or  taking  a  sickle  into  his  grain-field  to  reap 
the  grain  for  one’s  self  (23 : 24,  25).  Allowance  is  made  for 
the  weakness  of  human  nature  in  that  the  visitor  is 
allowed  to  pluck  and  eat  all  that  he  wishes.  What  a 
boon  this  would  be  to  the  Negro  in  his  white  neighbor’s 
melon-patch !  The  removing  of  landmarks  against  which 
the  prophets  had  protested  is  prohibited  in  27:17; 
this  was,  of  course,  a  method  of  increasing  one’s  own 
holdings  of  land  at  the  expense  of  one’s  neighbors. 
A  proper  sense  of  justice  is  reflected  in  the  decision 
ascribed  to  Moses  that  the  Reubenites  and  Gadites 
who  had  been  helped  by  the  rest  of  Israel  to  obtain  their 
settlements  east  of  the  Jordan  should  cross  over  and  aid 
their  brethren  in  securing  the  west  of  the  Jordan  for 
themselves  (3 : 18  ff.). 

77.  Influence  of  prophets. — The  increased  interest  in 
the  poor  and  weak  and  the  added  emphasis  upon 
Yahweh’s  demand  for  justice  as  compared  with  the 
corresponding  material  in  the  Covenant  Code  (pp.  53-61), 
is  evidence  of  the  influence  of  the  preaching  of  the  great 
prophets  upon  the  public  mind.  Deuteronomy  is  a 
product  of  the  prophetic  age  and  represents  a  composite 
of  prophetic  and  priestly  materials.  In  a  sense  it  is  a 
compromise  between  the  two  schools  of  thought.  It  is 
an  attempt  to  put  the  prophetic  ideals  into  legal  form 
and  to  bring  the  whole  force  of  the  law  to  their  enforce¬ 
ment.  It  was  a  step  fraught  with  great  danger,  since  it 
opened  the  way  for  the  substitution  of  the  legalistic 


142 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


spirit  for  the  free  spirit  of  prophecy.  To  put  this  in 
another  way,  it  was  the  beginning  of  the  movement 
which  ended  by  substituting  the  authority  of  the  past 
for  the  inspiration  of  the  present.  It  accepted  a  “thus 
said  Yahweh”  in  place  of  a  “thus  saith  Yahweh.”  It 
tended  to  cause  the  conscience  of  the  present  and  its 
confidence  in  the  validity  of  its  own  judgments  to  become 
dulled,  in  that  religious  and  moral  decisions  must  always 
be  determined  by  the  law  once  delivered  in  days  gone 
by  to  the  great  men  who  were  no  longer  living  and 
serving. 

Deuteronomy  itself  marks  progress.  It  definitely 
and  explicitly  prohibits  human  sacrifice,  divination, 
sorcery,  soothsaying,  enchantments  and  charms,  wizards, 
and  necromancers  (18 :  io  ff.).  Enlightenment  and  intel¬ 
ligence  are  taking  the  place  of  ignorance  and  superstition. 
The  high  ideals  of  the  Covenant  Code  as  to  restoring 
stray  animals  to  their  owners  and  helping  unfortunate 
neighbors  to  raise  a  fallen  animal  are  here  reaffirmed 
(22:1-4).  Animals  even  are  not  wholly  disregarded 
for  the  master  must  unmuzzle  the  ox  that  tramples 
upon  his  grain  on  the  threshing-floor  (25:4;  cf.  5:14); 
and  while  the  eggs  or  young  of  a  bird  may  be  taken 
from  the  nest,  the  dam  must  be  released  (22:6,  7). 
The  motive  for  this  latter  law,  which  is  given  nowhere 
else,  is  not  clear;  whether  impelled  by  economic  consider¬ 
ations  or  by  sympathy,  or  by  superstition  is  open  to 
question.  Mankind  is  warned  against  undue  self-pride 
and  urged  to  give  credit  for  his  achievements  to  Yahweh 
(8:11  ff.).  And  one  aphorism  regarding  the  philosophy 
of  living  was  thought  worthy  at  a  later  age,  when  given 
a  slightly  different  shade  of  meaning,  to  be  placed  upon 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


143 


the  lips  of  Jesus  when  lured  by  Satan  in  the  wilderness, 
“man  does  not  live  upon  bread  alone;  but  upon  every¬ 
thing  that  proceeds  from  the  mouth  of  Yahweh  does  man 
live”  (8:3).  The  thought  here  is  not  in  a  contrast 
between  bread  and  Yahweh’ s  word,  but  rather  in  the 
truth  that  all  of  man’s  subsistence  and  existence  is 
dependent  upon  the  good  will  of  Yahweh,  to  whom,  there¬ 
fore,  he  should  be  profoundly  grateful.  While  a  proper 
humility  before  Yahweh  is  thus  inculcated,  it  must  not 
be  forgotten  that  the  individual  man  as  man  is  possessor 
of  a  certain  personal  worth  and  dignity  that  must  not 
be  imperiled.  Even  in  the  infliction  of  corporal  punish¬ 
ment,  the  rights  of  personality  must  be  respected; 
and  so  no  man  may  be  given  more  than  forty  stripes, 
for  in  such  a  case  “thy  brother  would  be  dishonored 
before  thy  eyes”  (25: 1-3). 

78.  The  motive  for  goodness. — One  of  the  outstanding 
characteristics  of  the  Deuteronomic  ethics  is  the  constant 
and  ever- recurring  obtrusion  of  the  motive  for  goodness. 
This  is  the  dominant  note  of  the  whole  book  and  of  the 
Code  itself.  The  motive  is  in  principle  always  the  same. 
Whether  for  nation  or  for  individual,  the  inducement  to 
keep  the  law  is  never  lacking.  It  is  urged  upon  the 
Israelite  at  every  turn  and  is  so  inseparable  from  the 
Deuteronomic  thought  as  to  constitute  an  almost 
infallible  test  of  Deuteronomic  editorial  activity  where- 
ever  it  appears.  It  is  phrased  in  various  ways :  “Hearken 
etc.  that  ye  may  live  ”(4:1);  “  that  it  may  go  well  with 
thee  and  with  thy  children  after  thee,  that  thou  mayest 
prolong  thy  days  upon  the  land”  (4:40;  5:16,  29; 
6:2,  18;  7:12-16;  8:1;  11:8,  9;  11:20  f.;  12:25,  28; 
16:20;  17:20;  22:7);  “ Yahweh  commanded  us  to  fear 


144 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Yahweh  for  our  good  always  that  he  might  preserve  us 
alive  etc.”  (6 : 24) ;  “it  shall  be  our  righteousness,  if  we  ob¬ 
serve  to  do  all  this  commandment  ”  (6:25;  24:13).  The 
favor  of  Yahweh  in  the  bestowal  of  concrete  and  material 
blessings  is  the  reward  for  virtue  and  the  loss  of  these 
blessings  is  the  penalty  for  disobedience  and  vice.  “It 
shall  come  to  pass  that  if  you  hearken  attentively  to  my 
commandments  ....  then  I  will  give  the  rain  of  your 
land  in  its  season,  the  early  and  the  later  rain;  and  thou 
shalt  gather  thy  corn  and  thy  new  wine  and  thy  oil;  and 
I  will  give  herbage  in  thy  field  for  thy  cattle,  and  thou  shalt 
eat  and  be  satisfied.”  (11:13-15).  But  on  the  contrary,  if 
Israel  is  disobedient,  rebellious,  and  disloyal,  then  “the 
anger  of  Yahweh  will  burn  against  you  and  he  will 
restrain  the  heavens  and  there  will  be  no  rain  and  the 
ground  will  not  yield  its  increase,  and  you  will  perish 
quickly  from  upon  the  goodly  land  which  Yahweh  is 
going  to  give  you”  (1 1 : 17;  cf.  4:25  If. ;  n :  22  ff.,  26  ff.; 
15:18).  It  is  noteworthy  that  in  the  great  enumeration 
of  blessings  and  curses  at  the  close  of  the  book  (28:1-68), 
constituting  a  list  of  rewards  and  punishments  for  virtues 
and  vices  respectively,  the  list  of  curses  is  far  more 
extended  than  the  corresponding  list  of  blessings.  It  is 
quite  apparent  that  in  the  thought  of  the  makers  of  those 
lists  the  motive  of  fear  as  a  deterrent  from  evil  was  looked 
upon  as  far  more  effective  than  the  motive  of  gain  as  an 
incentive  toward  the  good. 

As  we  have  seen  in  our  study  of  the  morals  of  the 
prophetic  teachings,  this  motive  of  reward  for  piety  and 
punishment  for  disobedience  is  characteristic  of  all  the 
prophets.  It  was  the  only  practical  motive  operative 
with  the  great  mass  of  the  people  in  pre-exilic  Israel, 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


145 


even  if,  indeed,  it  is  not  so  with  the  majority  of  the  human 
race  today.  Some  appreciation  of  less  tangible  aspects 
of  life  was  slowly  developing,  but  no  such  idealistic 
sentiments  had  achieved  sufficient  standing  to  have 
obtained  recognition  in  the  law.  It  is  worthy  of  note 
that  to  a  very  large  extent  the  laws  and  precepts  of  the 
Deuteronomic  Code  are  without  definite  and  specific 
penalties,  but  are  dependent  upon  the  support  of  public 
sentiment  and  upon  the  hopes  and  fears  of  the  people 
for  their  enforcement.  That  is  why  there  is  so  much 
of  the  hortatory  and  persuasive  element  in  the  Deuter¬ 
onomic  Code.  The  legislators  are  appealing  to  the 
desires  and  fears  of  the  people  themselves  to  secure 
conformity  to  the  law  and  not  to  any  great  extent  to 
any  official  authority  with  power  to  enforce  its  will  as 
expressed  in  the  letter  of  the  law.  This  subjective 
element  in  Deuteronomy,  as  also  in  the  prophetic  sermons, 
was  one  of  the  great  educational  influences  of  pre-exilic 
Israel  tending  to  develop  an  enlightened  and  keenly 
sensitive  conscience,  at  least  in  the  more  spiritually 
minded  members  of  the  Hebrew  community. 

79.  The  claim  for  Mosaic  authorship. — There  remains 
for  consideration  an  aspect  of  the  Deuteronomic  legisla¬ 
tion  that  has  given  much  concern  to  many  people.  The 
Book  of  Deuteronomy  and  the  Code  it  sets  forth  make 
the  claim  of  Mosaic  origin;  the  laws  were  given  by 
Yahweh  himself  through  Moses  to  the  people  of  Israel 
(1:1;  4: 1  I3  f-j  44  f - ;  5:1-5;  6:1  f.;  8:1;  10:1-5; 
11:32;  27:1,  et  passim).  Similar  claims  are  made  for 
the  Decalogue  in  Exodus  and  the  Covenant  Code 
(Exod.  20: 1,  22,  E;  24: 18,  E;  32: 16,  E;  34: 1,  27,  28,  J; 
etc.).  If  there  is  one  thing  above  all  others  clearly 


146  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


established  by  historical  and  literary  criticism  it  is 
that  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  and  its  Code  originated 
centuries  later  than  the  days  of  Moses.  What  then 
shall  we  say  to  such  claims  as  are  made  by  the  authors  ? 
Are  they  deliberate  lies  made  with  intent  to  deceive? 
Before  deciding  that  question,  we  should  consider  the 
attitude  of  the  ancient  world  to  such  matters.  We 
have  a  close  parallel  in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi.  Ham¬ 
murabi  reigned  in  Babylonia  from  2123-2081  b.c.  In 
January,  1902,  a  code  of  laws  promulgated  by  this 
king  was  found  by  the  French  expedition  at  Susa,  the 
capital  of  ancient  Elam,  whither  it  had  been  carried  by  an 
Elamite  conqueror  of  Babylon.  Hammurabi’s  Code  pre¬ 
supposes  the  existence  of  an  ancient  and  highly-developed 
civilization  in  Babylon.  As  we  have  seen  (pp.  49  f.),  a 
code  is  the  last  stage  in  the  development  of  a  body  of 
law,  and  presupposes  as  the  materials  for  its  construction 
earlier  statutes  and  customs.1  Hammurabi’s  Code  was 
no  exception  to  this  rule.  We  actually  have  in  our  hands 
now  the  older  Sumerian  family  laws  which  were  taken 
over  by  Hammurabi  and  incorporated  in  his  Code.  Some 
of  these  laws  are  almost  verbatim  duplicates  of  laws  in 
Hammurabi’s  Code  and  they  antedate  that  Code  by 
centuries.2  Hammurabi  then  was  but  an  editor,  reviser, 

1  For  an  excellent  statement  of  this  fact,  see  J.  G.  Frazer,  Folk-Lore 
in  the  Old  Testament ,  III  (1918),  93  ff. 

2  See  A.  T.  Clay,  “A  Sumerian  Prototype  of  the  Hammurabi  Code,” 
Orientalistische  Literatur-Zeitung,  XVII  (1914),  1  ff.,  who  says,  “It  is 
now  quite  clear  from  a  tablet  in  the  Yale  Babylonian  Collection  not 
only  that  the  Code  of  Hammurabi  was  preceded  in  point  of  time  by  a 
Sumerian  code  or  codes,  as  has  hitherto  been  maintained,  but  also,  as 
has  been  naturally  inferred,  that  the  Babylonian  law-giver  actually 
based  his  laws  upon  existing  codes.”  See  also  A.  T.  Clay,  Miscellaneous 
Inscriptions  in  the  Yale  Babylonian  Collections  (1915),  p.  45- 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  SCHOOL 


147 


codifier  of  law;  he  did  not  originate  ab  ovo ,  nor  did  he 
receive  it  straight  from  the  heavens.  Yet  Hammurabi 
represents  himself  on  his  stele  as  standing  before 
Shamash,  the  god  of  justice,  and  receiving  the  law  from 
him.  To  leave  no  possibility  of  our  misunderstanding 
the  pictured  scene,  he  distinctly  says  in  the  Epilogue 
to  his  Code:  “ Hammurabi,  the  King  of  righteousness, 
to  whom  Shamash  has  communicated  the  laws,  am  I.” 
This  statement  is  not  a  later  bit  of  praise  ascribed  to  the 
king  by  distant  admirers;  it  is  under  his  own  authority; 
it  is  his  own  claim.  It  is  not  necessary  to  charge  either 
Hammurabi  or  the  authors  of  the  Deuteronomic  legisla¬ 
tion  with  deliberate  fraud;  to  do  so  would  show  a  lack 
of  the  genuinely  historical  mind.  The  explanation  is 
to  be  found  partly  in  the  ancient  Weltanschauung ,  which 
was  through  and  through  religious.  Everything  good 
was  credited  to  the  activity  of  the  gods.  Hammurabi, 
therefore,  would  inevitably  attribute  to  the  inspiration  of 
the  gods  any  thought  that  came  to  him  for  the  betterment 
of  the  existing  legislation  of  his  land,  in  whatever  form 
that  inspiration  might  work  itself  out.  Similarly  the 
Hebrews  were  wholly  honest  in  claiming  a  divine  origin 
for  their  laws.  It  was  their  perfectly  sincere  explanation 
of  the  genesis  of  their  law.  In  this  they  were  of  the  same 
mind  as  the  ancient  world  in  general.  The  Cretans  at¬ 
tributed  their  law  to  Jupiter,  the  Spartans  derived  theirs 
from  Apollo;  the  Romans  claimed  that  Numa  wrote 
their  laws  at  the  dictation  of  the  goddess  Egeria;  the 
Etruscans  got  theirs  from  the  god  Tages.1  Further,  in 

1  See  de  Coulanges,  La  cite  antique  (13th  ed.,  1890),  p.  221  (cited  by 
Causse,  Les  Prophetes  d1  Israel  et  les  Religions  de  VOrient  [1913],  p.  71). 
Strabo  (XVI,  2,  38  f.),  who  was  born  63  b.c.,  notes  the  fact  that  ancient 
legislators  presented  their  laws  as  of  divine  origin. 


148  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


regard  to  the  Deuteronomic  Code,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  this  was  a  body  of  law  in  large  measure  resting 
upon  the  past.  Much  that  is  in  this  Code  goes  back 
into  relatively  ancient  times.  Consequently  it  required 
no  stretch  of  the  imagination  to  call  it  a  Mosaic  produc¬ 
tion.  There  is  no  sufficient  reason  to  deny  the  possibility 
of  the  origin  of  some  of  the  customs  incarnated  in  this 
Code  in  a  period  at  least  as  old  as  that  of  Moses;  and 
the  makers  of  the  Code  were  not  interested  in  nor 
equipped  for  a  task  of  fine  historical  discrimination.1 
Finally,  the  purpose  of  the  Deuteronomists  must  be 
reckoned  with.  They  were  not  concerned  in  a  task  of 
literary  or  historical  criticism.  In  their  day  questions  of 
this  sort  had  not  arisen  anywhere  in  the  world.  Rights 
of  authorship  were  of  no  particular  value,  nor  were 
charges  of  plagiarism  reckoned  with.  There  was  no 
conscience  upon  such  matters.  These  men  were  con¬ 
cerned  in  putting  through  a  great  reform  movement 
which  absorbed  their  whole  energy.  To  render  the  path 
of  reform  less  arduous,  they  laid  hold  of  the  old  tradition 
lhat  Moses  obtained  laws  from  Yahweh  at  Sinai  and  they 
gave  their  law,  which  was  a  combination  of  old  and  new 
legislation,  all  the  prestige  that  attached  to  the  name  of 
Moses.  They  had  the  co-operation  of  a  representative 
of  the  prophets  in  carrying  out  their  plan  (II  Kings 
22:14-20).  Judged  by  the  standards  of  their  own  day, 
they  were  wholly  within  their  rights;  and  no  other 
standards  can  be  properly  applied  to  their  acts. 

1  We  still  speak  of  Webster's  Dictionary  though  much  of  its  contents 
came  into  being  after  Webster’s  day. 


CHAPTER  VII 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  EXILES 

80.  The  situation  of  the  exiles. — In  597  b.c.  and 
again  in  586,  the  Babylonian  army  invaded  Palestine, 
defeated  the  Jews  who  had  revolted  against  Babylon’s 
authority,  and  finally  destroyed  Jerusalem  and  carried 
off  the  most  influential  elements  of  the  population  into 
exile  in  Babylonia.  This  condition  of  subjection  to 
Babylon  continued  till  the  rise  of  Persia  and  the  issuance 
of  a  decree  by  Cyrus  permitting  the  exiles  to  return  to 
the  home-land  (II  Chron.  36:22  f.;  Ezra  1:1-4).  This 
catastrophe  dealt  a  fatal  blow  to  the  old  popular  religion 
which  had  banked  upon  Yahweh’s  loyalty  to  his  people 
and  had  derided  the  prophets  and  persecuted  them  for 
their  predictions  of  dire  disaster.  These  events  had 
vindicated  the  prophets  at  least,  and  had  shown  that  the 
smug  complacency  of  the  people  and  their  political 
leaders  was  without  solid  foundation.  They  were  left 
without  a  program  and  with  faith  imperiled.  Amid  these 
conditions  and  in  the  closing  days  of  the  Babylonian 
supremacy,  there  lived  the  prophet  whose  writings  are 
now  found  in  Isaiah,  chapters  40-5 5. 1  What  the  prob¬ 
lems  of  his  day  were  and  how  he  tried  to  solve  them  are 
clearly  shown  in  his  utterances.  For  the  sake  of  con- 

1  For  the  considerations  that  lead  to  placing  these  chapters  in  this 
period,  see  S.  R.  Driver,  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament 
(1914),  pp.  230-46;  G.  B.  Gray,  A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment  (^13),  pp.  184  f.;  J.  Skinner,  The  Book  of  the  Prophet  Isaiah , 
chaps,  xl-lxvi  (Cambridge  Bible,  1917),  pp.  xv-xl;  J.  A.  Bewer,  The 
Literature  of  the  Old  Testament  (1922),  pp.  200-213. 


149 


150  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

venience,  this  prophet  is  usually  distinguished  from  Isaiah 
of  the  eighth  century  b.c.  by  being  called  Deutero-Isaiah. 

Our  interest  here  is  in  the  ethical  side  of  the  situation 
in  which  Deutero-Isaiah  and  his  contemporaries  found 
themselves.  But  we  must  introduce  our  consideration 
of  that  by  following  the  prophet’s  general  line  of  thought. 
The  old  prophetic  teaching  that  piety  is  rewarded  by 
prosperity  was  in  desperate  need  of  rehabilitation.  The 
easy  explanation  that  Yahweh  was  punishing  the  sinful 
Israel  through  the  hands  of  a  pagan  nation  no  longer  satis¬ 
fied  Jewish  minds.  As  we  have  already  seen  (pp,  105  ff.), 
it  had  given  rise  to  serious  questions  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  pre-exilic  period.  The  answer  given  by  Habakkuk 
was  not  equal  to  the  solution  of  the  problem  as  it  was 
now  formulating  itself.  This  is  the  task  to  which 
Deutero-Isaiah  gave  himself.  A  solution  of  the  prob¬ 
lem  was  essential  if  his  countrymen  were  to  continue  to 
believe  in  Yahweh. 

81.  The  goodness  of  God. — It  is  quite  evident  that 
many  Jews  were  strongly  tempted  to  forego  their  faith 
in  Yahweh,  as  a  result  of  the  series  of  disasters  that  had 
befallen  them.  Were  not  the  gods  of  the  Babylonians 
the  rulers  of  the  universe?  Why  remain  loyal  to  a 
powerless  deity,  who  was  unable  to  protect  or  reward  his 
followers?  It  is  to  meet  such  a  state  of  mind  that 
Deutero-Isaiah  gives  so  much  prominence  to  the  power 
of  Yahweh  and  particularly  to  his  creative  energy  (see 
e.g.,  Isa.  40:12-17,  22-26;  42:5;  43:16).  To  the  same 
end,  he  ridicules  the  idolatry  of  Babylon,  pointing  out 
the  futility  of  idols  in  masterly  manner  (see  especially 
Isa.  40:18-20;  44:10-20;  and  46:1-7).  He  also  uses 
the  argument  from  prediction  to  contrast  the  greatness 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  EXILES 


151 

of  Yahweh  with  the  nothingness  of  Babylon’s  idols 
(see  41:21-29;  42:9;  43:9,  10,  12;  44:6-8;  48:14). 
But  the  people’s  thought  is  that  if  the  prophet’s  state¬ 
ments  are  true,  then  Yahweh  surely  does  not  love  his 
people,  or  he  has  forgotten  them  (40:27).  To  this 
charge  the  prophet  brings  a  fervent  denial,  setting  up 
his  own  firm  confidence  in  the  divine  goodness  in  opposi¬ 
tion  to  the  doubt  of  the  people: 

But  Zion  said:  “Yahweh  has  forsaken  me, 

And  the  Lord  has  forgotten  me.” 

Can  a  woman  forget  her  sucking  child, 

And  not  have  compassion  upon  the  son  of  her  womb  ? 

Even  if  these  should  forget,  I  will  not  forget  thee. 

See — I  have  graven  thee  on  the  palms  of  my  hands; 

Thy  walls  are  constantly  before  me  [Isa.  49:14-16]. 

And  again: 

For  as  a  wife  forsaken  and  wounded  in  spirit,  will  Yahweh 
summon  thee; 

And  a  wife  wedded  in  youth — that  she  should  be  aban¬ 
doned!  saith  thy  God. 

For  a  brief  moment  I  forsook  thee, 

But  with  great  tenderness  will  I  gather  thee. 

In  a  little  anger,  I  hid  my  face  from  thee  for  a  moment, 

But  with  unending  kindness  will  I  be  tender  toward  thee, 

Says  thy  vindicator,  Yahweh. 

Like  the  days  of  Noah  is  this  to  me; 

As  I  swore  that  the  waters  of  Noah 
Should  never  again  flood  the  earth, 

So  do  I  swear  that  I  will  not  be  wroth  with  thee, 

Nor  chide  thee. 

For  though  the  mountains  depart, 

And  the  hills  remove, 

My  kindness  shall  not  depart  from  thee, 

Nor  shall  my  covenant  of  peace  remove; 

Says  Yahweh  who  loves  thee  [Isa.  54:6-10]. 


152  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

In  pursuance  of  this  line  of  thought,  the  prophet 
assures  Israel  that  her  sins  which  were  the  cause  of  her 
distress  (42:24;  43:27,  28)  have  now  been  punished  in 
full  (40: 1,  2)  and  are,  indeed,  blotted  out  from  Yahweh’s 
memory  (43 : 25).  Not  only  so,  but  the  new  age  in  which 
Yahweh’s  favor  will  be  gloriously  manifested  in  behalf 
of  his  people  is  already  at  the  door  (41:11;  45:8;  46:11- 
13).  The  agent  of  Israel’s  deliverance  from  her  foes  is 
even  now  upon  the  scene  and  engaged  in  his  great  work. 
Cyrus,  the  Persian,  was  for  the  prophet  the  anointed  of 
Yahweh  for  this  tremendous  task  (41:2-6,  25;  44:28; 
45:1;  46:11;  48:14,  15).  Let  Israel  gird  herself  in 
readiness  for  the  return  home  (43:14-21;  55:1-5). 

82.  The  problem  of  suffering. — There  remains,  how¬ 
ever,  the  difficult  fact  that  Israel  has  suffered  in  compari¬ 
son  with  other  peoples  out  of  all  proportion  to  her  sins. 
The  prophet  himself  seems  to  admit  this  in  his  opening 
utterance  (40:1).  Before  the  people  can  have  any  very 
confident  faith  in  the  prophet’s  promises  or  in  Yahweh’s 
goodness  toward  them,  some  explanation  must  be  forth¬ 
coming  of  the  long  history  of  suffering  with  its  terrible 
climax  of  disaster  amid  which  they  are  all  now  living. 
If  Yahweh  loves  his  people,  why  has  he  led  them  through 
so  bitter  an  experience  ?  What  a  strange  manifestation 
of  love ! 

Not  only  the  love  of  Yahweh,  but  also  his  righteous¬ 
ness  was  at  stake.  How  could  a  righteous  administrator 
of  the  universe  permit  such  perversions  of  right  as  the  fate 
of  Israel  to  continue  indefinitely  ?  The  writer  of  Isaiah, 
chapters  40-55,  meets  this  state  of  mind  in  two  ways. 
The  first  attempt  at  solution  of  the  problem  is  the  reitera¬ 
tion  of  the  declaration  that  the  new  age  which  is  about 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  EXILES 


153 


to  dawn,  and  in  which  Yahweh  will  deliver  Israel  from 
all  foes,  will  be  a  glorious  manifestation  of  the  righteous¬ 
ness  of  Yahweh.  The  prophet  again  and  again  uses  the 
word  “  righteousness  ”  as  descriptive  of  this  approaching 
deliverance.  The  term  “righteousness”  is  for  him 
almost  synonymous  with  “vindication”  and  “deliver¬ 
ance.”  It  is  a  usage  of  the  word  which  is  characteristic 
of  this  prophet  as  of  no  other  writer.  Nothing  could  be 
better  proof  that  the  great  problem  of  the  thought  of 
the  times  was  that  of  the  righteousness  of  God.  See, 
for  example,  such  passages  as  45:8,  21,  23,  especially 
such  words  as  these  in  46: 13: 

I  bring  near  my  righteousness;  it  shall  not  be  far  off ; 

And  my  salvation  shall  not  tarry ; 

And  I  will  place  salvation  in  Zion 

For  Israel  my  glory. 

But  promises  for  the  future,  no  matter  how  glowing, 
cannot  wipe  out  the  memory  of  the  past;  and  no  prog¬ 
ress  can  be  made  in  winning  back  the  people’s  confidence 
in  Yahweh  until  some  satisfactory  explanation  of  past 
sufferings  is  forthcoming.  It  is  at  this  point  that 
Deutero-Isaiah  makes  his  chief  contribution  to  the 
thought  of  his  day.  This  contribution  is  formulated 
in  a  series  of  four  oracles  commonly  known  as  the  Serv¬ 
ant  of  Yahweh  Songs,  viz.  (1)  Isaiah  42 : 1-4;  (2)  49 :  1-6 ; 

(3)  So;4-9;  and  (4)  52:13— 53:i2. 

83.  The  Servant  Songs  have  given  rise  to  an  extensive 
literature  in  modern  times.  Two  main  questions  have 
been  under  discussion:  (i)  are  the  Songs  from  the  author 
of  the  remainder  of  Isaiah,  chapters  40-55,  or  are  they 
from  some  other  writer  ?  (2)  who  is  to  be  understood  as 
representing  the  servant  of  Yahweh  of  whom  the  Songs 


i54 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


are  continually  speaking  ?  We  may  not  take  space  here 
for  the  discussion  of  these  introductory  matters,  which 
will  be  found  fully  treated  in  many  other  places.1  We 
shall  proceed  upon  the  conviction  that  the  Songs  are 
the  product  of  the  same  pen  that  produced  Isaiah, 
chapters  40-55,  as  a  whole,  and  that  the  Servant  of 
Yahweh  in  the  Songs,  as  is  clearly  the  case  outside  of 
the  Songs,  is  none  other  than  the  nation  of  Israel  as  a 
whole.  Sometimes  the  nation  is  seen  at  its  worst,  but 
more  often  it  is  magnificently  idealized  and  thus  sum¬ 
moned  to  the  achievement  of  its  best.  The  Servant  is 
positively  identified  with  Israel  in  49 : 3  ;2  and  there  is 
no  good  reason  to  question  the  legitimacy  of  this  identi¬ 
fication.  The  statements  in  the  English  version  of 
49:5,  6  which  seem  to  rule  the  nation  out  as  a  candidate 
for  recognition  as  Servant  disappear  from  the  text  with 
a  better  translation,  viz. : 

And  now,  Yahweh,  who  formed  me  from  the  womb  to  be  his 
servant,  says  that  he  will  restore  Jacob  to  himself  and  that  Israel 

1  See  e.g.,  for  the  question  of  the  unity  of  Isa.,  chaps.  40-55,  B. 
Duhm,  Das  Buck  Jesaia  (3d  ed.,  1914),  pp.  xix  f.;  J.  Skinner,  The  Book 
of  the  Prophet  Isaiah ,  chaps,  xl-lxvi  (Cambridge  Bible,  1917),  pp.  xv- 
xxxi,  and  257-63;  K.  Marti,  Das  Buch  Jesaja  (1900),  p.  xv;  T.  K. 
Cheyne,  Introduction  to  the  Book  of  Isaiah  (1895),  pp.  237-83;  G.  B. 
Gray,  A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament  (1915),  pp.  184-87; 
S.  R.  Driver,  An  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament  (new 
edition,  1914),  pp.  230-46.  For  the  varying  views  of  the  identity  of 
the  Servant,  see  e.g.,  K.  Budde,  American  Journal  of  Theology ,  III 
(1899),  499  ff.;  T.  K.  Cheyne,  art.  “Servant  of  the  Lord”  (§§  1-4), 
Encyclopaedia  Biblica,  Vol.  IV  (1903);  A.  S.  Peake,  The  Problem  of 
Suffering  in  the  Old  Testament  (1904),  pp.  34-72,  180-93;  S.  Mowinckel, 
Der  Knecht  Jahwds  (1921). 

2  The  defenders  of  a  personal  servant  have  to  drop  this  verse  as  a 
later  interpolation.  But  this  is  without  warrant  other  than  the  neces¬ 
sities  of  the  theory. 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  EXILES 


155 


shall  be  gathered  to  him — for  I  shall  be  honored  in  the  eyes  of 
Yahweh  and  my  God  will  be  my  strength — yea,  he  says,  “In  view 
of  the  fact  that  thou  art  my  servant,  it  is  too  light  a  thing  that  I 
should  but  raise  up  the  tribes  of  Jacob  and  restore  the  preserved 
of  Israel ;  and  so  I  will  give  thee  as  a  light  of  the  nations,  that  my 
deliverance  may  be  unto  the  end  of  the  earth.” 

84.  The  first  Song  (42:1-4)  calls  attention  to  the 
Servant,  sets  forth  the  method  of  his  mission,  and  states 
its  purpose.  He  is  commissioned  of  Yahweh  to  cause 
“the  right”  to  go  forth  to  the  nations  from  one  end  of 
the  earth  to  the  other.  He  is  to  accomplish  this  neither 
by  force  nor  by  ordinary  methods  of  publicity.  The 
impression  left  is  that  of  a  rather  passive  witness  to  “the 
right”;  he  serves  to  illustrate  and  illumine  “the  right” 
for  the  whole  world.  This  word,  “the  right,”  is  here 
descriptive  of  the  religion  of  Yahweh  as  a  whole.  It  is 
significant  that  this  term  should  be  used,  since  by  its 
use  attention  is  focused  upon  the  ethical  element  in 
the  religion  of  Yahweh.  Yahweh,  therefore,  is  here 
declaring  that  it  is  the  mission  of  the  Servant  to  make 
the  Yahweh-religion  known  to  the  world  and  that  this 
mission  will  be  accomplished  without  fail.1 

85.  In  the  second  Song  (49:1-6),  the  servant  invites 
the  attention  of  the  world  to  the  fact  of  his  divine  call 
and  the  intention  of  Yahweh  to  glorify  himself  in  Israel. 
He  confesses  that  he  has  been  discouraged  at  times  as 
he  has  seen  his  labor  come  to  naught,  but  he  has  sustained 

1  For  expressions  here  applied  to  the  Servant  and  elsewhere  applied 
to  Israel  cf.  42:1  and  41:10  (“I  uphold”);  41:8  (“I  have  chosen”); 
so  also  43:20  and  45:4;  and  44:3  (“My  Spirit  upon”).  The  Greek 
rendering  of  the  Septuagint  inserts  in  42:1  the  word  “Israel”  before 
“My  chosen”  and  the  word  “Jacob”  before  “my  servant,”  showing 
at  least  that  this  was  the  interpretation  given  to  the  servant  by  the  Jews 
of  the  second  and  third  centuries  b.c. 


156  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


himself  with  the  conviction  that  his  vindication  and 
recompense  are  in  Yahweh’s  keeping  and  in  due  time 
will  be  forthcoming.  Now,  he  proudly  declares  that 
Yahweh,  who  destined  him  of  old  to  be  his  Servant,  will 
restore  him  (viz.,  Israel)  to  his  own  land,  and  not  content 
with  that  will  make  him  a  “ light  of  the  nations/’  that 
the  vindication  of  Israel  and  Yahweh  may  extend  through 
the  known  world.1 

86.  In  the  third  Song  (50:4-9),  the  Servant  relates  the 
story  of  the  long  period  of  discipline  through  which 
Yahweh  has  put  him  and  the  severe  character  of  that 
training,  to  which  he  submitted  uncomplainingly  because 
he  had  confidence  in  the  goodness  of  the  ultimate  purpose 
of  Yahweh.  He  completes  this  recital  with  a  challenge 
to  his  foes  to  array  themselves  against  him,  assuring  them 
that  Yahweh  is  on  his  side  and  that  therefore  they  can 
do  naught  but  meet  with  ruin.  As  the  prophet  here 
describes  the  past  attitude  of  Israel,  he  is  indulging  in  a 
bit  of  imaginative  idealism ;  for  in  actuality  there  has 
rarely  been  a  more  persistent  and  recalcitrant  rebel 
than  Israel  showed  itself  to  be  under  foreign  domination 
in  the  pre-exilic  days.  But  idealization  of  both  past  and 
future  was  always  easy  for  the  prophets  and  Deutero- 
Isaiah  himself  was  master  of  the  art. 

87.  The  Great  Song. — In  none  of  the  first  three  songs 
have  we  progressed  any  further  in  the  way  of  explanation 
of  Israel’s  past  and  present  sufferings  than  the  claim  that 
these  sufferings  were  of  disciplinary  value  and  that  the 
chastened  Israel  is  to  be  glorified  and  made  the  agent  of 

1  For  the  same  personal  terms  as  appear  in  49:1  applied  to  the 
Servant,  cf.  44:2  and  46:3,  where  they  are  used  in  connection  with 
Israel. 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  EXILES 


157 


the  conversion  of  the  whole  world  to  the  religion  of 
Yahweh.  It  remains  for  the  last  song  (52 : 13 — 53 : 12)  to 
offer  an  explanation  of  the  sufferings  themselves.  This 
Song  is  better  entitled  the  Glorified  Servant  than  the 
Suffering  Servant,  as  is  commonly  done.  In  the  first 
stanza  (52:13-15),  Yahweh  calls  attention  to  his  Serv¬ 
ant  and  foretells  that  he  will  attain  to  exalted  glory; 
that  even  as  his  sufferings  in  days  gone  by  have  amazed 
the  world,  so  in  the  coming  days  nations  and  kings  will 
be  stricken  dumb  with  amazement  as  they  shall  see 
unheard  of  things  taking  place  for  his  good. 

Behold,  my  Servant  shall  prosper; 

He  shall  be  exalted  and  lifted  up,  and  shall  be  very  high. 

Just  as  many  were  amazed  at  thee — 

So  marred  was  his  appearance  from  that  of  a  man, 

And  his  form  from  that  of  the  sons  of  men — 

Even  so  shall  he  startle  many  nations; 

On  account  of  him  kings  shall  shut  their  mouths. 

For  what  was  not  told  them  they  shall  see, 

And  what  they  have  not  heard  they  shall  discern. 

In  the  second  stanza  (53 : 1-3),  the  nations  themselves 
are  dramatically  introduced  to  express  their  astonish¬ 
ment  at  what  they  see  and  hear.  It  is  so  entirely  con¬ 
trary  to  all  that  anyone  could  have  expected.  The  past 
history  of  the  Hebrew  nation  has  been  so  disastrous  that 
no  nation  was  willing  to  be  associated  with  so  con¬ 
temptible  a  people.  Indeed  so  far  gone  was  the  nation 
on  its  path  to  ruin  that  it  was  given  up  for  dead. 

Who  could  have  believed  what  we  have  heard  ? 

And  the  arm  of  Yahweh — to  whom  was  it  revealed  ? 

For  he  grew  up  before  him  like  a  suckling, 

And  like  a  root  out  of  dry  ground. 

He  had  no  form  nor  charm,  that  we  should  look  upon  him, 


158  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Nor  beauty,  that  we  should  covet  him; 

Despised  was  he  and  abandoned  of  men, 

A  man  of  pain  and  familiar  with  sickness. 

And  as  one  before  whom  men  hide  their  faces 

He  was  despised,  and  we  reckoned  not  with  him. 

In  the  third  stanza  of  the  Song  (53:4-6),  the  nations 
continue  speaking  and  go  on  to  state  the  interpretation 
of  the  past  history  of  Israel’s  suffering  which  they  now 
understand.  In  remorseful  gratitude  they  declare  that 
the  afflictions  borne  by  Israel  should  rightfully  have 
come  upon  themselves,  and  that  Israel’s  bearing  of  his 
punishment  has  brought  deliverance  to  them.  It  was 
the  will  of  Yahweh  that  Israel  should  bear  the  penalty 
of  the  sins  of  the  world. 

Verily,  our  sicknesses  he  bore, 

And  our  pains  he  carried; 

But  we  regarded  him  as  stricken, 

Smitten  of  God  and  afflicted. 

But  he  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions, 

Crushed  for  our  iniquities. 

The  chastisement  of  our  welfare  was  upon  him ; 

And  through  his  stripes  we  were  healed. 

All  we  like  sheep  had  gone  astray; 

We  had  turned  every  one  to  his  own  way; 

But  Yahweh  made  to  alight  upon  him, 

The  guilt  of  us  all. 

In  the  fourth  stanza  (53:7-9),  the  nations  complete 
their  statement.  They  describe  the  submissive  attitude 
of  the  Servant  beneath  all  his  afflictions,  though  he  was 
oppressed  and  wronged  and  finally  done  to  death,  not¬ 
withstanding  the  fact  of  his  innocence  and  integrity. 
Death  is  here,  of  course,  a  symbol  of  the  Babylonian 
captivity  which  brought  the  national  existence  of  Israel 
to  an  end. 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  EXILES 


159 


He  was  oppressed  and  he  was  afflicted, 

But  he  opened  not  his  mouth. 

Like  a  lamb  he  was  led  to  the  slaughter; 

And  as  a  ewe  is  dumb  before  her  shearers, 

Even  so  he  opened  not  his  mouth. 

By  oppression  and  by  judgment  he  was  taken  away.1 
And  his  generation — who  gave  it  any  thought  ? 

For  he  was  cut  off  from  the  land  of  the  living; 

For  our  transgressions  he  was  smitten  to  the  death.2 
And  they  made  his  grave  with  the  wicked, 

And  with  the  rich  his  tomb;3 
Though  he  had  done  no  violence; 

Nor  was  there  deceit  in  his  mouth. 

In  the  fifth  and  last  stanza  (53:10-12),  the  prophet 
takes  up  the  word  again  only  to  give  place  to  Yahweh 
himself,  who  closes  the  Song.  The  stanza  reiterates  the 
statement  that  the  suffering  of  the  Servant  was  God- 
ordained  and  for  the  purpose  of  saving  others  from  the 
consequences  of  their  sin.  But  it  goes  on  to  repeat  the 
thought  of  the  opening  stanza  by  announcing  the  glori¬ 
fication  of  the  Servant  as  his  reward  for  having  borne 
the  sin  of  the  many. 

Yet  it  pleased  Yahweh  to  crush  him  by  sickness. 

If  his  soul  would  make  a  guilt-offering, 

He  should  see  his  seed,  he  should  prolong  his  life, 

And  the  purpose  of  Yahweh  would  prosper  in  his  hand. 

Of  the  travail  of  his  soul  he  should  see  and  be  satisfied. 

Through  knowledge  of  him  the  righteous  one — my 
Servant — should  justify  many; 

1  Or  by  a  slight  change  of  text,  read  with  Marti:  “deprived  of 
judgment  he  was  taken  away.” 

2  This  involves  slight  changes  of  text  which  are  in  part  suggested 
by  the  Greek  version.  The  Hebrew  text  as  it  stands  reads,  “For  the 
transgression  of  my  people  a  stroke  (was)  to  him.” 

3  Hebrew  =  “ in  his  deaths.” 


i6o 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


And  should  carry  their  iniquities. 

Therefore,  I  will  give  him  a  portion  among  the  great, 

And  with  the  strong  he  shall  share  spoil, 

Because  he  bared  his  soul  to  the  death; 

But  he  bore  the  sin  of  many, 

And  interceded  for  transgressors. 

We  may  now  gather  up  the  contribution  of  the  Serv¬ 
ant  Songs  to  the  solution  of  the  great  ethical  problem 
of  the  Exile:  Why  has  Israel  suffered  so  terribly  ?  How 
can  Yahweh  be  considered  just,  if  he  has  the  power  to 
protect  his  people  and  yet  has  failed  to  take  care  of 
them  ? 

88.  The  solution. — In  considering  the  answer  of  the 
Songs  it  will  be  noted  that  the  sufferings  of  the  Servant 
are  all  in  the  past.  The  future  holds  in  store  for  him 
nothing  but  glory.  The  sufferings  have  been  keen  and 
long  drawn  out,  but  they  are  to  yield  a  “far  more  exceed¬ 
ing  weight  of  glory  ”  in  days  to  come.  You  have  suffered, 
0  Israel,  only  that  you  may  have  greater  joy  in  the 
glorious  future.  Not  only  so,  but  this  suffering  has  been 
of  vicarious  value.  Israel  has  suffered,  not  for  his  own 
sins;  but  for  the  sins  of  the  nations.  Yahweh  is  God 
of  the  world  and  he  is  a  righteous  God;  therefore  sin 
must  always  be  punished.  Unpunished  sin  is  abnormal 
in  a  moral  universe.  Israel  has  therefore  received  the 
punishment  due  to  others.  To  our  modern  minds  the 
question  immediately  presents  itself,  Wherein  is  the  jus¬ 
tice  of  punishing  one  nation  for  the  sins  of  other 
nations?  This  is  precisely  the  point  at  which  our 
prophet  made  his  contribution  to  the  ethical  thought 
of  his  day.  The  Hebrew  world  of  the  Exilic  period  had 
grown  up  amid  the  conception  of  group  solidarity.  That 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  EXILES  161 

is  to  say,  the  individual  had  not  yet  come  into  his  full 
rights;  he  was  reckoned  with  primarily  merely  as  one 
of  a  social  group.  His  identity  was  lost  in  that  group. 
The  common  thought  of  the  times  was  that  the  Hebrews 
of  the  Exilic  period  were  suffering  for  the  sins  of  Ma- 
nasseh’s  generation.  The  group  of  the  Exilic  age  was  the 
same  as  the  group  of  that  earlier  day.  Individuals  died 
but  the  group  as  such  continued  to  live.  Its  life  was 
continuous.  Hence  to  punish  the  group  at  one  point 
in  its  history  for  sins  it  had  committed  at  another  earlier 
stage  was  perfectly  legitimate  to  a  public  mind  that 
focused  its  attention  and  interest,  not  upon  the  welfare 
of  individuals,  but  upon  the  welfare  of  the  group  as  a 
whole.  Or  to  punish  one  section  or  member  of  the 
group  for  the  sins  of  another  section  or  member  was  a 
common  procedure.  We  have  seen  Israel  smitten  severely 
because  of  the  sins  of  the  king.  We  have  seen  innocent 
individuals  sharing  in  the  punishment  meted  out  to  the 
guilty,  because  they  belonged  to  the  same  family  or 
social  group.  The  prophets  were  always  concerned  with 
the  interests  of  the  nation  primarily;  any  attention  that 
they  gave  to  individuals  was  but  secondary  and  was 
motivated  by  the  fact  that  the  individual  was  an  im¬ 
portant  factor  in  the  nation.  The  thinking  of  Israel 
had  been  done  for  generations  largely  in  terms  of 
solidarity.1 

The  prophet  Deutero-Isaiah  continued  to  think  in 
terms  of  solidarity.  His  problem  was  not  the  welfare  of 
individuals,  but  the  welfare  of  Israel.  But  he  took  a 
long  step  forward.  He  widened  the  group  concept  until 

1  See  the  study  of  the  rise  of  the  sense  of  personal  responsibility  in 
my  Prophet  and  His  Problems  (1914),  chap.  vii. 


162 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


it  was  broad  enough  to  include  the  entire  world.  He 
had  thought  long  and  earnestly  upon  the  problem  of 
Israel’s  suffering.  He  was  continually  confronted  by  the 
fact  that  Israel’s  fate  was  inextricably  interwrought 
with  the  life  of  the  nations  round  about  her.  He  could 
not  escape,  if  he  had  wished  to  do  so,  the  knowledge  that 
Israel  and  its  neighbors  were  all  bound  up  in  the  bundle 
of  life  together.  Their  economic,  social,  political,  mili¬ 
tary,  and  religious  life  was  all  interpenetrated,  each  by 
that  of  every  other  state.  Not  only  so,  but  Deutero- 
Isaiah  and  his  most  enlightened  fellow-Hebrews  had  been 
forced  by  the  logic  of  events  to  accept  a  monotheistic 
world.  They  had  made  Yahweh  the  God  of  the  Uni¬ 
verse.  It  was  not  a  far  cry  from  this  point  of  view  to 
the  position  that  all  men  everywhere  were  the  creative 
offspring  of  Yahweh.  This  at  once  gave  them  a  tie 
binding  all  nations  together  into  one  great  family  under 
the  common  God  and  Father.  But  when  that  comes  to 
pass,  we  have  a  field  for  the  operation  of  the  old  principle 
of  solidarity  on  a  world-wide  scale.  So  Deutero-Isaiah 
proceeded  to  solve  his  problem  for  himself  and  his 
contemporaries  by  giving  it  a  world  atmosphere.  Israel 
is  but  one  element  in  the  world  family.  Yahweh  has 
been  punishing  her  for  the  sins  of  other  members  of 
the  family.  This  was  an  extremely  bold,  yea,  a  daring 
step  for  a  prophet  to  take  in  those  days.  The  feeling  of 
Israel  toward  the  nations  was  anything  but  cordial;  it 
was  bitterly  resentful  and  fiercely  hostile.  For  a  prophet 
to  ask  his  people  to  regard  themselves  as  members  of  one 

great  family  with  their  oppressors  and  as  having  suffered 

* 

untold  calamities  in  punishment  for  the  sins  of  those 
same  oppressors  was  to  challenge  incredulity  and  ridicule, 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  EXILES 


163 


if  not  deadly  opposition.  How  unacceptable  that  mes¬ 
sage  was  to  Deutero-Isaiah’s  times  and  how  unintelligible 
it  was  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that,  so  far  as  we  have  any 
information,  not  a  single  follower  of  this  interpretation 
was  forthcoming  among  his  prophetic  contemporaries 
and  successors,  and  no  reference  even  is  made  to  this 
substitutionary  interpretation  of  suffering  until  IV  Mac¬ 
cabees  1 : 11 ;  9:29;  and  17:21  f. 

That  such  a  world-view  was  possible  to  Deutero- 
Isaiah  is  shown  by  the  frequency  with  which  he  recurs  to 
the  conception  that  Israel’s  mission  in  the  world  was  to 
make  Yahweh  known  to  the  nations  (see  42:4,  6; 
45:22,  23;  49:6,  7,  22;  51:4).  He  can  even  speak  of 
Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  as  Yahweh’s  “  Messiah,”  “ whose 
right  hand  I  have  holden”  (45:1).  He  conceives  of  the 
nations  as  coming  from  far  countries  and  prostrating 
themselves  before  the  Jews  and  acknowledging  Yahweh 
as  the  only  true  God  (45: 14  f.;  54:5;  55:4!.).  It  is  in 
this  connection  indeed  that  he  makes  a  further  contri¬ 
bution  to  the  interpretation  of  suffering  in  the  Servant 
Songs  themselves.  The  sufferings  of  Israel,  the  Servant, 
are  declared  by  him  not  only  to  have  paid  the  penalty 
due  the  nations  at  large  for  their  sins,  but  also  to  have 
constituted  the  very  means  by  which  the  nations  are  to 
be  brought  to  a  recognition  of  Yahweh  as  the  true  God 
and  to  a  realization  of  their  own  sinfulness.  Israel’s 
sufferings  have  had  not  only  punitive,  but  also  redemp¬ 
tive  value.  It  is  as  the  nations  behold  the  exaltation  of 
the  Servant  which  is  soon  to  take  place  that  they  will 
come  to  a  recognition  of  the  real  meaning  of  his  sufferings. 
Realizing  this,  that  Israel  was  suffering  in  their  place, 
they  will  be  smitten  with  shame,  contrition,  and  con- 


1 64  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


fession  and  thus  will  be  brought  into  reconciliation 
with  Israel’s  God  and  accept  him  as  their  own.1 

“To  transform  the  conception  of  substitutionary 
sacrifice  into  so  sublime  an  interpretation  of  the  signifi¬ 
cance  of  suffering  is  a  spiritual  achievement  at  which  the 
world  will  ever  marvel.  To  believe  that  righteous  men, 
by  moral  transformation  through  suffering,  may  in  the 
very  moment  of  seeming  defeat  and  humiliation  be 
actually  working  out  the  redemptive  purpose  of  God  is 
to  give  to  the  world  a  transcendent  interpretation  of  the 
deepest  mystery  of  life.  Even  what  human  judgment 
declares  to  be  a  dire  affliction  serves  the  purpose  of  the 
righteous  God,  and  although  it  does  not  cease  to  be  a 
real  evil,  it  becomes  completely  moralized.”2 

1  See  also  E.  D.  Burton,  J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  and  G.  B.  Smith, 
Biblical  Ideas  of  Atonement  (1909),  pp.  34-38;  and  for  a  more  complete 
presentation  of  the  interpretation  here  given,  see  J.  M.  Powis  Smith, 
“The  Ethical  Significance  of  Isaiah,  Chapter  53,”  Journal  of  Religion , 
m  (1923),  132-40. 

2  G.  B.  Smith,  in  E.  D.  Burton,  J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  G.  B.  Smith, 
Biblical  Ideas  of  Atonement  (1909),  p.  279. 


PART  III 


THE  MORALS  OF  JUDAISM 


k 


I 


CHAPTER  VIII 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 

89.  The  two  sources  of  information  for  this  chapter 
are  the  Book  of  Ezekiel  and  the  Holiness  Code.  These 
two  come  together  naturally,  for  they  were  produced 
at  about  the  same  time  and  they  are  so  alike  in  spirit 
and  method  that  they  have  been  regarded  by  some 
scholars  as  the  products  of  one  and  the  same  author.1  In 
point  of  chronological  sequence,  they  belong  to  the  period 
preceding  the  work  of  the  prophet  treated  in  our  last 
chapter;  but  they  are  the  first  expression  of  a  new 
spiritual  attitude  in  Israel  which  continued  to  exercise  a 
dominant  interest  all  through  its  later  history,  while 
Deutero-Isaiah  brought  the  career  of  prophecy  to  a 
splendid  climax  and  clearly  marks  the  close  of  a  period 
of  creative  spiritual  vision. 

90.  Nature  of  Judaism. — The  new  type  of  thought 
and  feeling  introduced  by  Ezekiel  is  best  known  as 
Judaism.  Ezekiel  has  been  aptly  entitled  the  “Father 
of  Judaism.”  There  are  four  outstanding  character¬ 
istics  of  this  type  of  thought.  First  of  all,  it  is  narrow 
and  exclusive.  It  is  intensely  particularistic.  It  is 
interested  in  Jews,  first,  last,  and  all  the  time.  The 
broad,  catholic  spirit  of  Deutero-Isaiah  is  wholly  want¬ 
ing.  The  present  world  ought  to  be,  and  the  coming  age 
will  be,  a  Jewish  world,  with  all  other  peoples  existing 
only  for  the  glory  of  the  Jews  and  the  God  of  the  Jews. 

1  See  e.g.,  Graf,  Die  geschichtlichen  Bucher  des  alien  Testaments 
(1866),  pp.  81-83;  Colenso;  and  Horst,  Lev.  17-26  und  Hezekiel  (1881). 

167 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


1 68 

A  second  aspect  of  Judaism  is  its  emphasis  upon  the 
importance  of  ritual  and  its  legalistic  interpretation  of 
religion.  Scarcely  anything  is  left  to  the  spontaneous 
expression  of  the  free,  exuberant  spirit.  Everything  is 
reduced  to  ceremonial  order  and  brought  into  line  with 
legalistic  prescription.  Almost  the  entire  life-activity  of 
the  individual  is  ultimately  brought  within  the  scope  of 
legalistic  and  ceremonial  enactment.  Religion  and  life 
become  a  procession  of  deeds  properly  performed. 
Thereby  the  attempt  is  made  to  render  the  whole  of 
life  pleasing  to  God  by  keeping  out  of  its  area  of  being 
everything  that  is  evil  and  filling  it  up  with  innumerable 
acts  of  ceremonial  and  legal  piety.  By  such  means  is 
the  favor  of  God  secured  and  freedom  from  further 
disaster  guaranteed.  A  third  facet  of  this  system  reveals 
its  splendidly  idealistic  disregard  for  the  actual  facts  of 
life.  Its  ideals  must  be  carried  through  at  all  costs. 
Nothing  shall  stand  in  their  way.  This  gives  a  certain 
air  of  unreality  to  much  of  the  content  of  Judaism.  For 
example,  Ezekiel,  in  arranging  the  holdings  of  the  tribes 
in  Palestine  for  the  coming  Golden  Age,  gives  them  each 
an  equal  width  of  territory,  descending  from  the  north 
to  the  south,  regardless  of  the  varying  width  of  the  strip 
of  land  between  the  Mediterranean  and  the  desert,  and 
regardless  of  the  fact  that  some  portions  would  fall  in 
the  fertile  plain  of  Esdraelon  while  others  would  be  made 
up  largely  of  relatively  barren  mountain  range.  He  also 
arbitrarily  and  daringly  introduces  a  river  as  taking  its 
rise  in  the  temple  mount  and  making  its  way  down  to 
the  Dead  Sea,  fructifying  and  vitalizing  all  that  it 
touches.  For  such  men  hard  facts  give  way  to  lovely 
dreams.  Having  seen  the  disappearance  of  all  chance 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 


169 


of  achievement  of  their  goal  for  the  nation  through 
natural  means,  they  take  refuge  in  the  supernatural. 
Being  freed  from  the  necessity  of  conforming  to  the 
requirements  of  reality,  they  give  free  reign  to  their 
imaginations.  In  dealing  with  an  imaginary  world, 
they  ignore  the  facts  of  experience  and  freely  create 
situations  and  conditions  that  would  be  unintelligible  in 
a  real  world.  Cutting  loose  from  reality,  they  are  afloat 
upon  a  boundless  ocean  of  fantasy.  We  read  their  writ¬ 
ings  not  as  the  reports  of  mariners  returning  from  the  dis¬ 
covery  of  new  worlds,  but  as  the  glowing  visions  of  eager 
hearts  forced  to  stay  at  home.  The  fourth  main  feature 
of  this  Judaistic  conception  of  life  was  its  fondness  for 
eschatological  and  apocalyptic  interpretations  of  the  past, 
present,  and  future.  In  brief,  this  was  an  expression  of 
despair  as  to  the  possibilities  of  self-improvement  on  the 
part  of  the  human  race  in  general  and  the  Jewish  people 
in  particular,  and  a  corresponding  dependence  upon  and 
hope  in  the  goodness  and  power  of  God.  All  betterment 
of  human  society  was  thought  of  as  coming  down  from 
above  rather  than  from  the  hearts  of  men.  The  Judaistic 
pictures  of  the  future,  therefore,  abound  in  the  miraculous 
and  the  supernatural  and  involve  a  complete  overthrow 
of  the  present  world-order  and  the  substitution  in  its 
place  of  a  Kingdom  of  God  coming  down  from  heaven. 
In  illustration  of  this  may  be  cited  the  lurid  description 
of  the  gathering  of  the  world-forces  under  Gog  of  Magog 
upon  the  field  of  Armageddon  and  their  destruction  at 
the  hands  of  God,  the  people  of  God,  viz.,  Israel,  having 
no  part  in  the  overthrow  other  than  that  of  burying  the 
dead  and  cleaning  up  the  battle-field  (Ezek.,  chaps.  38 
and  39).  A  different  type  of  illustration  is  furnished  by 


170 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Ezekiel,  chapters  40-48,  in  which  is  given  a  constitution 
for  the  government  of  the  coming  messianic  kingdom. 
This  is  a  strange  mixture  of  reality  and  unreality,  a 
moving  picture  of  things  more  or  less  as  they  are,  mingled 
with  such  things  as  never  were  on  land  or  sea. 

91.  Ezekiel  and  his  problem. — The  progenitor  of  the 
Judaistic  point  of  view  was  the  prophet  Ezekiel.1  He 
was  a  member  of  the  group  of  exiles  carried  to  Babylon 
in  597  b.c.  His  prophetic  activity  reached  as  far  as 
570  at  least  (cf.  29:17),  and  perhaps  somewhat  farther. 
As  a  prophet  he  was  confronted  by  the  same  problem 
as  his  compatriots,  the  problem  to  the  solution  of  which 
Deutero-Isaiah  later  gave  himself,  viz.,  “  Why  does  Israel 
suffer  ?”  This  was  the  overwhelming  religious  problem 
of  the  age.  An  answer  to  it  must  be  found  if  Israel's 
faith  in  Yahweh  was  to  be  preserved.  To  this  task 
Ezekiel  set  himself  bravely.  His  countrymen  left  be¬ 
hind  in  Jerusalem  were  discouraged  and  were  losing 
their  grip  upon  Yahweh.  They  were  saying, 

Yahweh  sees  us  not; 

Yahweh  has  forsaken  the  land  [Ezek.  8:12;  9:9]. 

His  fellow-sojourners  in  Babylon  had  even  more  occa¬ 
sion  than  those  left  behind  in  Jerusalem  to  doubt 
Yahweh’s  power  and  justice  and  they  were  not  slow 
to  give  expression  to  such  sentiments.  Ezekiel  quotes 
them  as  saying,  with  biting  irony: 

1  The  best  commentaries  on  Ezekiel  are:  A.  B.  Davidson  and  A.  W. 
Streane,  The  Book  of  the  Prophet  Ezekiel  (Cambridge  Bible,  1916);  W.  R. 
Lofthouse,  Ezekiel  (New  Century  Bible,  1909);  C.  H.  Toy,  The  Book  of 
the  Prophet  Ezekiel— A  New  English  Translation  with  Explanatory  Notes 
(1899);  R.  Kraetzschmar,  Das  Buch  Ezeckiel  (1900);  A.  Bertholet, 
Das  Buch  Hesekiel  (1897);  and  J.  Herrmann,  Ezechielstudien  (1908). 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 


171 


The  fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes, 

And  the  children’s  teeth  are  set  on  edge  [Ezek.  18:2]! 

And  more  bluntly, 

The  way  of  Yahweh  is  not  fair  [Ezek.  18:25,  29]. 

Ezekiel’s  answer  to  such  charges  and  complaints  is 
direct  and  forceful.  Israel  has  outdone  the  nations  in 
her  wickedness  (5:5-8),  and  the  exile  is  the  well-earned 
punishment  for  sin.  The  sins  of  the  present  generation 
are  so  heinous  that  even  Sodom,  Gomorrah,  and  Samaria, 
the  outstanding  embodiments  of  evil  thus  far,  cannot 
compare  with  Jerusalem  in  iniquity  (16:44-52).  There 
is  no  need  to  seek  the  cause  of  the  suffering  in  the  past; 
the  present  is  quite  equal  to  the  responsibility  of  furnish¬ 
ing  the  reason  for  Yahweh’s  wrath.  Ezekiel  is  tireless 
in  the  enumeration  and  denunciation  of  the  sins  of  his 
people.  These  catalogues  of  sin  include  not  only  ritual¬ 
istic  offenses,  but  also  numerous  violations  of  the  moral 
law,  such  as  murder,  oppression  of  the  poor  and  weak, 
disrespect  toward  parents,  lewd  conduct,  adultery,  usury, 
bribery,  violation  of  sexual  tabus,  talebearing,  robbery, 
and  juggling  with  weights  and  measures  (Ezek.  9:9; 
11:12;  22:7,  9-12,  29). 

92.  Among  the  more  heinous  sins  of  Ezekiel’s  list  are 
three  that  he  particularly  emphasizes.  He  charges  the 
prophets  of  his  day  with  being  so  far  lost  to  a  sense  of 
right  that  they  deliberately  prophesy  what  they  know  to 
be  lies;  and  they  do  it  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  living 
thereby  (13:1-23;  22:25!.).  In  estimating  the  value 
of  this  testimony,  allowance  must  be  made  for  the 
influence  of  odium  theologicum.  Ezekiel  and  the  proph¬ 
ets  he  denounces  are  representatives  of  opposing 
points  of  view.  Each  declares  the  other  to  be  in  the 


172 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


wrong,  and,  as  not  infrequently  happens,  charges  of 
moral  laxity  fly  back  and  forth.  It  may  well  have  been 
that  the  opponents  of  Ezekiel  were  just  as  honest  in 
their  mistaken  position  as  Ezekiel  was  himself.  But  that 
Ezekiel  should  recognize  such  sincerity  would  be  asking 
for  greater  tolerance  and  charity  than  the  representatives 
of  that  age  possessed.  A  second  offense  that  is  held  to 
have  been  in  and  of  itself  a  sufficient  warrant  for  the 
overthrow  of  Jerusalem  is  the  fact  that  the  graves  of 
the  kings  were  located  in  immediate  proximity  to  the 
temple  walls  (43:7-9).  The  third  great  crime  is  that 
they  have  sacrificed  their  own  sons  and  daughters  to 
foreign  gods  (16:20;  20:26;  23:39).  This  horrible 

practice,  carried  on  in  the  name  of  religion,  and  appar¬ 
ently  for  a  while  at  least  as  a  regular  part  of  the  Yahweh 
religion  itself,  aroused  Ezekiel’s  indignation  and  met 
with  his  unsparing  denunciation. 

The  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  who  were  not  trans¬ 
ported  into  exile  seem  to  have  been  even  worse  than  the 
exiles  in  Ezekiel’s  judgment.  He  declares  that  a  few 
survivors  will  be  left  from  the  final  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  for  the  purpose  of  publishing  abroad  the 
terrible  wickedness  of  the  city;  so  that  the  world  at  large 
may  know  that  Yahweh  did  not  destroy  it  without  suffi¬ 
cient  warrant  (12:16).  He  goes  even  further  and  assures 
his  fellow-exiles  that  when  they  shall  see  the  surviving 
remnant  of  the  population  of  Jerusalem  they  will  be 
consoled  by  the  revelation  of  their  moral  turpitude  for 
the  destruction  of  the  city: 

Behold,  therein  shall  be  left  a  remnant, 

Those  brought  forth,  both  sons  and  daughters. 

Behold,  they  shall  be  brought  forth  unto  you; 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 


173 


And  you  will  see  their  way  and  their  doings; 

And  you  will  be  consoled  over  the  disaster  that  I  have 
brought  upon  Jerusalem, 

All  that  I  have  brought  upon  her; 

For  they  will  console  you  when  you  see  their  way  and 
their  doings; 

And  you  will  know  that  not  for  nothing  have  I  done  all 
that  I  have  done  therein. 

It  is  the  oracle  of  the  Lord  Yahweh  [14:22,  23]. 

93.  The  cause  of  sin. — One  of  the  most  interesting 
points  of  view  in  this  interesting  book  of  Ezekiel’s  is  his 
explanation  of  the  origin  of  this  state  of  outbreaking  sin 
in  Israel.  Ezekiel  seems  to  have  been  a  thoroughgoing 
monotheist.  He  has  no  room  or  function  for  other 
responsible  agents  in  the  world-order  alongside  of  Yah¬ 
weh.  Other  and  later  writers  would  have  attributed  this 
glaring  wickedness  to  the  machinations  of  Satan.  But 
Ezekiel  does  not  shrink  from  laying  the  final  responsi¬ 
bility  upon  the  shoulders  of  Yahweh  himself.  He  says  that 
Israel  had  gone  so  far  in  iniquity  that  Yahweh  determined 
to  destroy  them  and  to  that  end  gave  them  wicked  statutes 
and  ordinances,  the  observance  of  which  would  give  him 
full  moral  justification  for  their  destruction. 

Wherefore  I  gave  them  also  statutes  that  were  not  good, 

And  ordinances  whereby  they  should  not  live; 

And  I  polluted  them  in  their  own  gifts, 

In  that  they  set  apart  all  that  openeth  the  womb, 

That  I  might  destroy  them, 

To  the  end  that  they  might  know  that  I  am  Yahweh 
[Ezek.  20:25,  26]. 

Here,  as  in  the  story  of  David’s  census  in  II  Samuel 
24:1,  no  moral  difficulty  was  felt  in  making  Yahweh 
incite  a  people  to  sin  and  then  punish  them  drastically 


174 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


for  that  sin.  The  emphasis  is  rather  upon  the  necessity 
of  furnishing  sufficient  justification  in  the  conduct  of  the 
people  for  the  fearful  punishment  they  are  undergoing. 

94.  No  vicarious  righteousness. — In  his  denial  of 
what  was  evidently  a  popular  doctrine,  Ezekiel  reveals 
another  phase  of  his  ethical  system.  In  14:12-20,  he 
flatly  contradicts  the  current  opinion  as  to  the  extent  of 
a  good  man’s  extenuating  influence  in  behalf  of  his 
countrymen.  There  he  maintains  that  God’s  purpose 
to  destroy  a  wicked  people  can  be  in  no  way  deflected 
by  the  presence  among  that  people  of  a  few  righteous 
individuals.  Even  though  Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job  were 
in  such  a  community  they  would  not  avail  to  save  it  from 
punishment;  the  best  they  could  do  would  be  to  save 
themselves.  There  is  no  place  for  vicarious  righteous¬ 
ness  in  Ezekiel’s  moral  program.  Here  he  departs  from 
the  standpoint  of  the  narrative  regarding  the  destruction 
of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  and  Abraham’s  plea  for  those 
doomed  cities;  and  he  would  have  found  it  hard  to  accept 
Deutero-Isaiah’s  interpretation  of  Israel’s  sufferings  as 
redeeming  mankind  at  large  (see  chap.  7).  He  is  con¬ 
cerned  here  with  emphasizing  the  inevitability  and 
completeness  of  the  coming  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

95.  Hope  for  the  future. — Though  Ezekiel  is  thus 
intent  upon  justifying  Yahweh’s  punishment  of  Israel  in 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  he  is  not  ready  to  stop 
there.  He  encourages  his  smitten  contemporaries  by 
holding  out  to  them  the  promise  of  a  glorious  future  for 
the  survivors  of  the  great  chastisement.  He  first  of 
all  takes  up  the  chief  nations  individually  and  portrays 
the  destructive  overthrow  awaiting  them  each  in  turn 
(chaps.  25-32).  He  particularly  points  out  that  this 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 


175 


punishment  is  coming  to  them  because  of  the  way  in 
which  they  have  abused  and  oppressed  the  Hebrews 
(see  28:24;  35:5,  10,  12).  He  then  passes  on  to  a  vivid 
and  lurid  description  of  the  final  overthrow  at  Armaged¬ 
don,  on  the  soil  of  Palestine,  of  all  the  foes  of  Yahweh 
and  of  Israel  in  one  great  battle  wherein  all  these  wicked 
peoples  are  destroyed.  There  is  no  place  in  Ezekiel’s 
scheme  of  things  for  foreigners.  But  with  all  the  for¬ 
eigners  destroyed  and  the  Hebrews  themselves  reduced 
to  a  mere  handful,  the  practical  question  presents  itself 
as  to  the  available  source  of  supply  for  the  citizenship 
of  the  new  world-order.  To  this  question,  Ezekiel  gives 
a  ready  answer  in  chapter  37.  He  takes  refuge  in  the 
inscrutable  wisdom  and  inexhaustible  resources  of  Yah¬ 
weh.  In  pictorial  fashion  he  says  to  his  people,  “You 
wonder  whence  the  population  for  the  new  golden  age 
is  coming.  But  consider  now:  it  is  inexplicable  to  you 
how  Yahweh  can  bring  the  dead  back  to  life;  and  yet  we 
know  that  he  can  and  does  do  it.  Even  so,  though  we 
know  not  how,  Yahweh  can  and  will  bring  to  life  again 
our  dead  nation  and  restore  us  to  our  own  land  and  estab¬ 
lish  us  as  his  people.”  For  this  restored  and  purified 
nation,  he  works  out  a  religious  program  and  constitu¬ 
tion  in  chapters  40-48.  By  living  in  accordance  with 
its  provisions,  the  future  generations  of  the  people  of 
Yahweh  will  be  guaranteed  against  the  repetition  of 
such  disasters  as  have  befallen  the  generation  of  the 
Exiles.  This  is  an  attempt  to  legalize  and  crystallize 
the  old  dogma  that  piety  must  yield  prosperity  and  sin 
involve  adversity.  It  goes  further  than  heretofore  in 
that  it  undertakes  to  prescribe  the  course  of  conduct  for 
the  community  more  definitely  and  specifically  than 


176  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


ever  before.  To  live  in  conformity  to  the  program  here 
outlined  is  piety,  and  such  a  course  of  life  is  a  guaranty 
of  the  divine  favor. 

96.  Individual  responsibility. — Thus  far  we  have  been 
dealing  with  Ezekiel’s  attitude  toward  the  problem  of 
the  nation’s  suffering  and  have  seen  how  he  sought  to 
justify  that  suffering  on  the  one  hand,  and  so  to  clear 
the  reputation  of  Yahweh;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  how 
he  held  out  hope  to  the  surviving  remnant  and  thus 
braced  them  for  endurance  of  their  hard  lot  until  the 
final  deliverance  of  Israel  should  come.  But  the  prob¬ 
lem  of  individual  welfare  was  also  acute  and  demanded 
his  attention.  The  rights  of  personality  and  the  impor¬ 
tance  of  the  individual  in  society  were  but  slowly  realized 
in  Israel.  In  the  earlier  days,  social  solidarity  had  made 
it  hard  for  the  individual  to  find  recognition  on  his  own 
merits.  He  counted  primarily  and  in  many  ways  only 
as  a  member  of  his  group,  whether  family,  tribe,  or  nation. 
But  certain  influences  in  the  developing  civilization  of 
Israel  were  working  persistently  toward  bringing  the  indi¬ 
vidual  to  the  fore  and,  with  the  tragic  experiences  of 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the  exile  of  the  population  to 
a  new  habitat,  the  individual  finally  came  into  his  own.1 
The  contemporaries  of  Ezekiel  clearly  recognized  the 
rights  of  the  individual;  and  it  is  interesting  to  find 
Ezekiel  driven  to  the  formulation  of  his  doctrine  of  indi¬ 
vidual  responsibility  by  a  sneer  at  the  old  theology  that 
was  current  at  that  time : 

The  fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes, 

And  the  children’s  teeth  are  set  on  edge  [Ezek.  18:2!! 

1  For  a  study  of  the  historical  development  of  the  idea  of  individual  re¬ 
sponsibility  before  God,  see  chap,  viiin  my  Prophet  and  His  Problems  (1914). 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 


177 


This  is  a  protest  on  the  part  of  the  people  against  the 
injustice  of  Yahweh’s  course  of  action:  “The  way  of 
Yahweh  is  not  fair”  (Ezek.  18:25,  29;  33:20).  A  man 
ought  not  to  suffer  for  the  conduct  of  his  parents. 
Ezekiel  accepts  that  proposition  fully  and  works  it  out 
in  detail.  He  declares  that  all  souls  are  equal  in  the 
sight  of  Yahweh,  the  creator  and  possessor  of  all,  and 
that  only  those  who  sin  are  punished  (Ezek.  18:4,  20). 
Yahweh  never  visits  chastisement  upon  a  pious  son  for 
his  father’s  sin  nor  vice  versa ;  consequently  if  a  man  fall 
into  trouble,  he  should  first  scrutinize  his  own  conduct  to 
discover  the  cause  of  the  disaster  and  not  seek  to  evade 
responsibility  and  guilt  by  placing  it  upon  the  shoulders 
of  his  parents. 

With  the  natural  enthusiasm  of  the  proponent  of  a 
new  doctrine,  Ezekiel  carries  his  individualistic  principle 
too  far.  He  seems  to  lay  emphasis  upon  deeds  rather 
than  upon  character.  It  is  not  what  a  man  is  that  counts 
so  much  as  what  a  man  does.  It  is  not  the  general 
trend  and  purpose  of  a  man’s  life  that  determines  his 
fate,  so  much  as  momentary  variations  from  his  normal 
program  (Ezek.  3:16-21;  33:12-20).  There  is  a  some¬ 
what  atomistic  quality  about  this  point  of  view; 
emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  details  of  life  rather  than 
upon  its  organic  unity.  On  the  other  hand,  it  must 
be  recognized  that  Ezekiel’s  teaching  on  this  matter 
would  tend  to  stress  the  importance  of  persistent  con¬ 
tinuance  in  well-doing  as  the  only  guaranty  of  uniform 
prosperity. 

Ezekiel  did  not  fail  to  apply  his  conception  of  the 
individual’s  responsibility  before  God  for  his  own  deeds 
to  the  conduct  of  his  own  life.  He  is  the  first  and  only 


1 78  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Hebrew,  so  far  as  we  know,  to  take  the  “cure  of  souls ”  as 
a  burden  upon  his  own  heart.  He  feels  a  personal 
responsibility  for  the  welfare  of  his  contemporaries  indi¬ 
vidually  and  expects  to  be  called  to  account  for  the  faith¬ 
ful  discharge  of  this  responsibility.  He  is  a  watchman 
for  his  fellow-Israelites  and  will  fail  in  his  duty  at  his 
own  peril  (Ezek.  3:16-21;  33:  1-9).  He  recognizes  this 
as  his  mission  from  God,  who  does  everything  in  his 
power  to  save  men  from  sin  and  its  consequences,  not 
desiring  that  any  should  perish : 

As  I  live,  says  the  Lord  Yahweh, 

Am  I  pleased  that  the  wicked  should  die, 

And  not  rather  that  the  wicked  should  turn  from  his  way 
and  live  ? 

Turn  ye,  turn  ye  from  your  evil  ways, 

For  why  will  you  die,  O  house  of  Israel  [Ezek.  33:11; 
cf.  18:23,  32]? 

97.  The  ideal  man. — Ezekiel  has  not  left  us  in  any 
doubt  as  to  what  his  ideal  of  a  just  and  righteous  man  is. 
He  has  put  himself  upon  record  on  this  subject  fully 
and  repeatedly  (see  Ezek.  18:5-20;  22:7,  9-12;  45: 
9-12;  46:16-18).  The  moral  element  in  Ezekiel’s 
requirements  is  clear  and  prominent.  The  good  man 
who  shall  enjoy  Yahweh’s  favor  must  be  just  and  law- 
abiding,  not  an  adulterer,  nor  a  thief,  nor  a  usurer,  nor 
an  oppressor,  but  one  who  makes  good  on  his  promises 
and  pledges,  is  generous  to  the  poor  and  needy,  and 
respects  and  honors  his  parents.  Similar  requirements 
are  laid  upon  the  rulers  and  particular  stress  is  laid 
upon  the  necessity  of  just  weights  and  measures,  the 
standards  for  which  are  expressly  indicated.  While 
Ezekiel  makes  no  place  for  foreigners  in  his  scheme  of 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 


179 


things,  he  does  provide  for  the  protection  of  the  interests 
of  the  “ stranger,”  i.e.,  the  defenseless  foreigner  who  has 
forsaken  his  own  people  and  placed  himself  under  the 
aegis  of  Israel  and  Israel’s  God  (Ezek.  47:22,  23). 

98.  Ritual  vs.  ethics. — Though  Ezekiel  gives  a  large 
place  to  the  moral  element  in  life,  it  is  nevertheless  not 
a  large  enough  place,  because  it  is  not  the  supreme 
place.  He  has  lost  something  of  the  ethical  passion  of 
the  earlier  prophets.  He  is  content  to  put  ethics  and 
ritual  side  by  side  upon  the  same  level.  His  constitu¬ 
tion  for  the  messianic  state  is  far  more  concerned  with 
the  necessity  of  ritualistic  regularity  than  with  the 
demand  for  moral  integrity.  Eating  “with  the  blood” 
is  for  him  a  heinous  offense  to  be  placed  alongside  of 
adultery  (33:25,  26).  The  ritualistic  and  the  moral  are 
coupled  together  in  his  catalogue  of  vices  and  virtues 
(Ezek.  18:5-20).  Ritual  has  within  itself  a  wonderful 
power  of  expansion.  Give  it  a  foot  and  it  will  take  an  ell. 
Ezekiel  let  the  camel’s  nose  of  ritual  into  the  sanctuary 
of  religion,  and  ritual  ended  by  occupying  nearly  the 
whole  structure.  The  soulless  legalism  of  later  Judaism 
was  the  direct  descendant  of  Ezekiel’s  ritualistic  inter¬ 
pretation  of  religion. 

99.  The  new  hirth. — In  closing  our  survey  of  Ezekiel’s 
contribution  to  the  moral  life  of  his  times,  one  other 
aspect  of  his  views  requires  mention.  Ezekiel  was  under 
no  illusions  as  to  the  inclinations  and  purposes  of  his 
countrymen.  As  he  contemplated  them  and  looked 
back  upon  their  history,  he  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  hope  of  Israel  lay  not  in  his  countrymen,  but  in  God. 
He  could  see  no  likelihood  of  moral  or  religious  better¬ 
ment  in  their  unaided  efforts.  He  was  thoroughly 


i8o 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


pessimistic  as  to  the  possibilities  of  the  human  spirit  in 
and  of  itself.  But  he  had  an  unlimited  confidence  in 
Yahweh  and  in  his  good  purpose  for  Israel,  and  he  saw 
that  purpose  working  itself  out  in  the  divine  regeneration 
of  the  Hebrew  people.  They  cannot  make  themselves 
good;  but  Yahweh  will  do  it  for  them: 

And  I  will  give  them  one  heart, 

And  I  will  put  a  new  spirit  within  you; 

And  I  will  remove  the  stony  heart  out  of  their  flesh, 

And  I  will  give  them  a  heart  of  flesh; 

That  they  may  walk  in  my  statutes, 

And  keep  mine  ordinances  and  do  them; 

And  they  shall  be  my  people, 

And  I  will  be  their  God  [Ezek.  11:19,  20;  see  also  36:25- 
27;  and  cf.  18:31]. 

This  and  the  promise  of  the  “new  covenant”  written  in 
the  heart  that  is  found  in  Jer.  31  ^i-^1  are  the  earliest 
known  expressions  of  the  teaching  of  the  new  birth  of 
which  Christianity  has  made  such  good  use.  It  empha¬ 
sizes  splendidly  the  profoundly  moral  principle  that  true 
goodness  must  find  its  inspiration  and  motif  coming 
from  within  and  not  from  without  the  heart  of  man. 
Ezekiel’s  Messianic  Kingdom  is  therefore  to  be  composed 
of  Jewish  citizens  who  have  been  miraculously  converted 
from  the  passions  and  purposes  of  their  former  selves 
and  given  new  hearts  that  shall  make  them  love  and 
long  for  the  ways  of  righteousness  and  of  God. 

1  Jer.  3  1 : 31-34  is  probably  a  later  addition  to  the  Book  of  Jeremiah; 
see  the  commentaries  on  Jeremiah  by  Movers,  and  Duhm;  also  Stade, 
Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel ,  I,  643,  and  Smend,  Lehrbuch  der  Alttesta- 
mentliche  Religionsgeschichte,  pp.  239-41;  and  N.  Schmidt,  Encyclopaedia 
Biblica,  cols.  934,  2391;  but  the  genuineness  of  the  passage  is  vigorously 
maintained  by  Giesebrecht,  Cornill,  Peake,  L.  E.  Binns,  and  W.  J. 
Moulton  ( The  Expositor  [1906],  pp.  370  ff.). 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 


181 


100.  The  Holiness  Code. — The  details  of  the  program 
of  Judaism,  especially  as  it  applies  to  the  life  of  the 
individual,  are  worked  out  in  the  Holiness  Code.1  This 
Code  appears  mainly  in  Lev.  17-2 6. 2  It  is  a  codifica¬ 
tion  of  customs  and  laws  that  in  large  part  had  grown  up 
in  the  generations  preceding  Ezekiel;  but  these  were 
newly  edited  and  revised  somewhere  about  Ezekiel’s  time; 
and  in  its  present  form  the  Code  reflects  essentially  the 
same  general  conception  of  religion  and  life  as  does  the 
prophet.  Its  dominant  idea  is  that  of  holiness,  which  is 
the  end  aimed  at  in  all  its  enactments.  This  fact  sug¬ 
gested  the  name  applied  to  it  by  modern  scholars.  The 
ethical  material  in  this  Code  is  abundant,  a  fact  that 
makes  it  stand  out  in  striking  contrast  with  the  rest  of 
the  priestly  law.  Our  treatment  of  it,  owing  to  the 
exigencies  of  space,  must  be  all  too  brief  and  bare.  It 
may  be  grouped  under  five  categories,  (1)  the  attitude 
toward  woman,  (2)  the  treatment  of  slaves,  (3)  protec¬ 
tion  of  the  weak  and  poor,  (4)  the  sense  of  justice,  and 
(5)  the  ethical  motives  of  the  legislation. 

10 1.  Estimate  of  woman. — It  is  significant  of  the 
relatively  low  estimate  of  woman  that  she  comes  into 
consideration  almost  wholly  from  the  point  of  view  of 
sexual  relations.  The  only  exception  is  that  children 
are  enjoined  under  penalty  of  death  to  refrain  from  curs¬ 
ing  mother  and  father  and  to  show  them  godly  fear 

1  This  term  was  first  introduced  (in  its  German  form,  Das  Heilig- 
keitsgesetz)  by  Ivlostermann,  Zeitschrift  fur  lutherisclie  Theologie  for  1877, 
pp.  401  ff. 

2  Other  fragments  of  this  code  are  found  according  to  some  inter¬ 
preters  in  Exod.  31:13,  14a;  Lev.  11:43-45;  and  Num.  15:37-41. 
For  a  careful  study  and  analysis  of  this  code,  see  Driver,  Introduction  to 
the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament  (1914),  pp.  47-59. 


182 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


(Lev.  1 9 : 3 ;  20 : 9) .  A  man  may  not  have  two  sisters  to  wife 
at  the  same  time  (Lev.  18: 18),  a  striking  departure  from 
the  patriarchal  practice  of  earlier  times.  Nor  may  a  man 
marry  a  mother  and  her  daughter  at  the  same  time  on  pen¬ 
alty  of  all  three  being  burned  together  (Lev.  20 : 14) .  Such 
laws  presuppose  the  right  of  a  man  to  a  plurality  of  wives; 
they  simply  restrict  the  range  of  his  selection  somewhat. 
Adultery  is  prohibited,  the  penalty  being  death  for  both 
participants  (Lev.  18:20;  20:10).  Sodomy  and  unnat¬ 
ural  lust  are  punished  by  death  (Lev.  18:22;  20:15, 
16).  Sexual  relations  are  forbidden  to  a  man  with  his 
sister,  his  son’s  wife,  his  father’s  wife,  his  aunts  on  either 
side  of  the  family,  his  brother’s  wife,  his  uncle’s  wife,  or 
a  menstruating  woman  (Lev.  20:11,  12,  17-21).  Fathers 
are  forbidden  to  make  harlots  of  their  daughters  (Lev. 
19:29) ;  and  a  priest’s  daughter  found  in  such  practice  is 
burned  (Lev.  21:9). 

102.  Slavery  does  not  receive  much  attention.  For¬ 
eigners  and  the  children  of  “ strangers”  may  be  held  in 
perpetual  slavery  (Lev.  25:44-46);  but  all  Hebrew 
slaves  must  be  freed  in  the  year  of  Jubilee  (Lev.  25: 
8-13).  The  poor  Hebrew  who  sells  himself  to  a  fellow- 
Hebrew  is  not  to  be  treated  with  rigor  as  a  slave  and 
must  be  fed  in  the  year  of  Jubilee  (Lev.  25:39-43,  46). 
If  he  sells  himself  to  a  “  stranger,”  he  is  to  be  treated  as 
a  hired  servant  and  may  be  redeemed  at  any  time,  either 
by  a  kinsman  or  by  himself;  and  in  any  case  he  must 
be  freed  in  the  Jubilee  year  (Lev.  25:47-55).  If  a  man 
violates  a  slave  woman  that  is  betrothed,  he  is  not  to 
be  slain  (she  was  only  a  slave!);  he  merely  brings  the 
guilt-offering  and  is  forgiven  (Lev.  19: 2of.).  These  reg¬ 
ulations  regarding  slaves  are  very  meager  and  inade- 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM 


183 


quate  and  show  little  consideration  for  the  rights  of 
slaves  as  human  beings.  But  the  attitude  of  the  times 
on  the  subject  of  slavery,  as  attested  by  the  conduct  of 
Jeremiah’s  contemporary  slave-holders  toward  their 
slaves,  made  it  very  difficult  to  initiate  or  enforce  legisla¬ 
tion  protecting  the  slave  in  any  effective  way. 

103.  The  needy  classes  in  Israel  were  the  poverty- 
stricken,  the  “  stranger,”  the  Levite,  the  defective,  the 
widow,  and  the  fatherless.  The  last  two  receive  no 
consideration  at  the  hands  of  the  Holiness  Code.  The 
poor-relief  measures  seem  rather  haphazard  and  unme¬ 
thodical;  but  the  spirit  of  the  law  is  good.  At  harvest 
time,  the  corners  of  the  field  must  not  be  reaped,  nor  the 
grain-fields  gleaned,  nor  the  vineyards  picked  clean; 
the  gleanings  of  all  must  be  left  for  the  poor  (Lev.  19 : 9  f . ; 
23:22).  The  poor  Hebrew  must  neither  be  oppressed 
nor  robbed;  nor  should  the  wages  of  a  servant  be  kept 
overnight  (Lev.  19:13).  The  deaf  must  not  be  cursed, 
nor  the  blind  caused  to  stumble  (Lev.  19:14);  for  in 
both  cases  the  victims  have  no  chance  to  guard  them¬ 
selves  against  danger.  The  “stranger”  is  not  to  be 
taken  advantage  of,  but  to  be  treated  like  a  fellow- 
Hebrew;  “thou  shalt  love  him  as  thyself”  (Lev.  19:33, 
34).  The  same  law  should  apply  to  the  “stranger”  and 
home-born  (Lev.  24:22).  Indeed,  in  urging  proper  treat¬ 
ment  of  the  poor  Hebrew,  the  law  insists  that  he  shall 
be  treated  like  a  “stranger”  (Lev.  25:35-40).  Of 
neither  should  any  interest  be  taken  upon  loans  of  money 
or  food.  The  financial  interest  of  the  Levite  is  guarded 
in  that  his  lands  are  inalienable;  and  his  town  property 
if  sold,  is  subject  to  a  perpetual  right  of  redemption  at 
any  time  and  must  return  to  him  or  his  heirs  in  the 


184  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


year  of  Jubilee  (Lev.  25:29-34).  The  general  and  all 
inclusive  principle  inculcated  is,  “Love  thy  neighbor  as 
thyself”  (Lev.  19:18, 34).  The  neighbor  here  is  of  course 
a  member  of  the  Hebrew  community.  It  was  the  task 
of  Stoicism1  and  later  Christianity  to  give  to  this  idea  an 
unlimited  scope  of  application  that  was  not  present  in 
the  minds  of  the  originators  of  this  precept. 

104.  The  Code's  sense  of  justice  is  all  pervasive  and 
penetrating.  The  common  vices  and  crimes  are  pro¬ 
hibited,  viz.,  theft,  cheating,  lying,  false  swearing,  and 
murder  (Lev.  19:11,  12,  13;  24:17-210).  The  pious 
Hebrew  must  not  be  a  talebearer  or  slanderer  (Lev. 
19: 16). 2  The  honest  business  man  will  not  use  false 
weights  and  measures  (Lev.  19:35,  36).  A  Hebrew  who 
is  maimed  by  his  fellow-Hebrews  is  entitled  to  the  satis¬ 
faction  of  seeing  his  injurer  suffer  the  same  injury  (Lev. 
24: 19,  20).  Yet  a  Hebrew  must  not  bear  grudge  against 
his  fellow,  hate  him  secretly,  nor  take  vengeance  (Lev. 
19:17,  18).  It  is  better  to  speak  out  the  wrath  that  is 
within  than  to  cherish  it  and  so  “bear  sin”  because  of  it. 
In  the  administration  of  justice  there  must  be  no  dis¬ 
crimination  either  in  favor  of  the  rich  or  of  the  poor. 
The  judge  must  be  absolutely  impartial,  moved  by  no 
considerations  aside  from  justice  (Lev.  19:15). 

The  regulations  regarding  the  year  of  Jubilee  reckon 
with  the  requirements  of  justice  in  various  details.  The 
main  provisions  of  the  institution  are  (1)  that  in 
the  fiftieth  year  all  landed  property  shall  return  to  the 

1  See  R.  D.  Hicks,  Stoic  and  Epicurean. 

2  The  phrase  in  vs.  16,  “thou  shalt  not  stand  up  against  the  blood 
of  thy  neighbor,”  probably  means  “thou  shalt  not  endanger  thy  neigh¬ 
bor’s  life  by  false  testimony.”  See  the  commentaries,  ad  loc. 


THE  PROGRAM  OF  JUDAISM  185 

families  that  originally  held  title  to  it;  (2)  that  all 
Hebrew  slaves  receive  their  freedom  in  the  year  of 
Jubilee;  (3)  that  all  farm  lands  rest  from  tillage  in  the 
fiftieth  year  as  well  as  in  every  seventh  year  (Lev. 
25:2-13).  This  makes  it  necessary  to  evaluate  prop¬ 
erty  in  buying  and  selling  in  proportion  to  the  number 
of  years  remaining  before  the  Jubilee  (Lev.  25:14-16). 
If  a  poor  man  must  sell  his  land,  it  is  the  duty  of  his 
kinsman  to  buy  it.  But  if  there  is  no  kinsman,  the 
seller  is  given  the  right  to  reclaim  his  land  at  any  time 
that  he  may  be  able  to  buy  it  back.  In  such  a  case, 
the  buyer  pays  on  the  basis  of  the  number  of  years 
remaining  before  the  Jubilee.  At  the  worst,  the  poor 
man  or  his  family  recovers  the  property  without  pur¬ 
chase  in  the  fiftieth  year  (Lev.  25:23-28).  A  house 
in  a  walled  city  may  be  redeemed  only  within  the  first 
year  after  the  sale  and  it  does  not  go  back  to  the  original 
owners  in  the  Jubilee,  though  houses  in  unwalled  villages 
are  treated  like  farm  lands  (Lev.  25:29,  34).  This  shows 
some  recognition  of  the  realities  of  the  complex  economic 
and  social  life  of  the  large  town.  A  poor  Hebrew  sold  to 
a  “ stranger”  may  be  redeemed  at  any  time,  account 
being  taken  of  the  time  he  has  still  to  serve  before  the 
Jubilee  (Lev.  25:47-55).  The  most  striking  proof  of 
the  unreality  of  this  legislation  in  general  is  the  provision 
made  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  regular  Sabbatical  year 
and  the  Jubilee  year  come  in  immediate  succession. 
How  shall  the  people  live  when  the  land  is  out  of  cultiva¬ 
tion  for  two  years  in  succession  ?  The  answer  is  simple 
beyond  belief;  the  forty-eighth  year  will  produce  crops 
sufficiently  abundant  to  provide  sustenance  for  the 
remaining  two  years  (Lev.  25:19-22). 


i86 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


105.  The  ethical  motives  brought  to  bear  in  the  Holi¬ 
ness  Code  are  quite  tangible  and  specific.  For  the  most 
part,  it  is  a  case  of  rewards  and  punishments.  These 
are  listed  in  chapter  26:3-41.  The  notable  thing  about 
this  list  is  the  materialistic  character  of  the  considera¬ 
tions  involved  and  the  preponderance  of  the  punish¬ 
ments  over  the  rewards.  The  appeal  is  evidently  largely 
made  to  the  element  of  fear.  This  is  attested  also  by 
a  survey  of  the  Code  as  a  whole.  The  death  penalty 
occurs  with  appalling  frequency  (18:29;  20:1-6,9-12, 
14,  15, 17;  18:21-29;  20:27;  22:35  23 : 29> 3°;  24:10-17, 
21  bj  23).  Among  the  methods  of  inflicting  the  death 
penalty  are  stoning  and  burning  (20:14,  27;  24:16). 
The  national  punishment  is  exile,  which  is  national 
death  (Lev.  18:26  fL;  20:22).  Furthermore,  ethics  is 
depreciated,  as  in  Ezekiel,  by  being  put  upon  the  same 
level  with  ritual  (see  e.g.,  17:3-16;  23:2 8  f . ;  24:10-16, 
23).  The  saving  element  in  the  Code  is  its  recognition 
of  the  law  of  love  to  which  attention  has  already  been 
called  (§  103).  If  this  law  had  been  given  full  sway, 
the  Holiness  Code,  with  its  insistence  upon  justice,  would 
have  been  ethically  supreme.  It  is  enough  praise,  how¬ 
ever,  for  one  Code  that  it  should  have  formulated  one 
such  principle. 


CHAPTER  IX 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 

106.  The  fifth  century. — In  this  chapter  we  shall  deal 
with  the  moral  conditions  and  ideals  in  Judaism  during 
the  latter  part  of  the  sixth  century  and  the  whole  of 
the  fifth  century  b.c.  The  sources  of  information  for 
this  period  are  the  books  of  Haggai,  Zechariah,  chapters 
1-8,  Malachi,  Obadiah,  Isaiah,  chapters  56-66,  Zechariah, 
chapters  9-14,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Ruth,  and  Jonah.  These 
books  represent  a  variety  of  points  of  view  and  deal 
with  many  aspects  of  the  situation  that  confronted 
Judaism  during  this  period.  It  was  in  general  a  period 
of  disillusionment.  The  high  hopes  that  had  been 
stimulated  and  encouraged  in  every  possible  way  by 
prophets  like  Ezekiel  and  the  author  of  Isaiah,  chapters 
40-55,  had  failed  of  fulfilment  and  the  mounting  spirits 
of  Jewry  were  dashed  to  earth.  The  exiles  had  been  led 
to  look  for  a  speedy  manifestation  of  the  messianic 
glory  and,  in  so  far  as  they  had  returned  to  Palestine, 
had  returned  in  anticipation  of  being  sharers  in  the  speedy 
triumph  of  the  coming  Messiah.  But  the  Persian  mon- 
archs  continued  to  rule  the  world.  The  return  to 
Judah  was  a  painfully  slow  and  long-drawn-out  process, 
being  participated  in  for  the  most  part  only  by  the  most 
idealistic  and  zealous  of  the  exiles.  The  practical, 
business-like  members  of  the  exilic  group  had  quickly 
adjusted  themselves  to  the  ways  and  conditions  of  their 
new  home  in  Babylonia  and  had  built  themselves  into 
its  social  and  economic  life.  They  had  gained  a  place 

187 


i88 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


for  themselves  and  were  not  any  more  anxious  to  leave 
behind  their  trade  and  business  in  Babylon,  in  order  to 
start  afresh  in  the  broken  and  ruined  life  of  Canaan, 
than  the  Jewish  merchants  and  bankers  of  the  United 
States  are  to  embrace  the  opportunity  of  returning  to 
Palestine  today.  They  were  not  attracted  by  the  invita¬ 
tion  to  announce  genuine  “  Sacrifice  Sales,”  and  to  put  up 
such  signs  as  “ Selling  Out,”  “Going  Out  of  Business.” 
Furthermore,  the  exiles  of  536  b.c.  were  for  the  most 
part  a  generation  bom  in  Babylonia;  they  had  never 
known  Jerusalem;  it  was  to  them  little  more  than  a 
name  with  some  sentimental  associations  of  a  slight  and 
tenuous  nature.  By  reason  of  these  things,  a  very  small 
number  had  gone  back  to  Judah.  So  the  population  of 
Jerusalem  and  Judah  was  made  up  of  the  descendants  of 
the  weakest  and  poorest  of  the  land,  whom  the 
Babylonians  had  not  thought  it  worth  while  to  transport 
to  Babylon,  and  of  a  slight  sprinkling  of  enthusiasts 
who  had  come  back  from  Babylon  and  were  probably  not 
significant  enough  either  in  personal  quality  or  in  numbers 
to  effect  any  great  change  in  the  progress  of  affairs  in 
Judah.  Still  further,  as  we  learn  from  Haggai,  chapter  1, 
the  crop  production  in  Canaan  during  these  first  years  of 
the  return  was  disappointingly  inadequate.  The  outlook, 
therefore,  was  gloomy  and  the  hearts  of  men  were  low. 

107.  The  task  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah. — Amid  such 
a  situation  Haggai  and  Zechariah  felt  themselves  called 
to  the  prophetic  office  in  520  b.c.1  They  were  therefore 

1  The  best  commentaries  on  Haggai  and  Zechariah  are  by  H.  G. 
Mitchell  (International  Critical  Commentary,  1912);  W.  E.  Barnes 
(Cambridge  Bible,  1917);  George  Adam  Smith  (Expositor’s  Bible,  1898); 
S.  R.  Driver  (Century  Bible,  1906);  W.  Nowack  {Hand-Kommentar 
zum  Alten  Testament,  3d  ed.,  1922);  K.  Marti  ( Kurzer  Hand-commentar 
zum  Alten  Testament,  1904). 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY  189 

confronted  by  the  same  problem  as  their  predecessors, 
with  its  seriousness  accentuated  by  the  longer  duration 
of  the  suffering.  “Hope  deferred  maketh  the  heart 
sick.”  It  was  necessary  that  Haggai  and  Zechariah 
should  find  some  explanation  for  the  long  delay  in  the 
coming  of  deliverance  and  prosperity.  They  must  do 
something  to  keep  alive  faith  in  Yahweh  and  to  maintain 
unimpaired  the  old  doctrine  that  prosperity  is  the  reward 
of  piety  and  disaster  is  the  punishment  of  sin.  To  this 
end  they  must  find  sin  great  enough  to  account  for  the 
continuance  of  the  bitter  experience  of  suffering.  Such 
a  sin  was  forthcoming,  according  to  the  judgment  of 
both  prophets,  in  the  failure  of  the  Jews  to  rebuild  the 
ruined  temple  in  Jerusalem  (Hag.  1 : 2-11;  Zech.  8:9  ff.). 
The  people  responded  to  this  challenge  and  straightway 
began  the  work  of  reconstruction  (Hag.  1:12-15). 
They  are  encouraged  to  persist  in  this  praiseworthy 
enterprise  by  glowing  promises  of  a  brilliant  future 
(Hag.  2:1-9).  The  people  were  too  impatient  to  wait 
long  for  results  and  they  grew  restless  as  the  hard  times 
continued  notwithstanding  their  activity  in  temple  build¬ 
ing.  The  prophet  assures  them  that  the  messianic 
age  is  near  at  hand  with  its  glory  and  prosperity  and 
two  months  later  (just  three  months  from  the  day 
when  the  rebuilding  was  begun)  he  reasons  with  them 
to  the  effect  that  they  can  hardly  expect  that  a  few  short 
months  of  pious  work  upon  the  temple  should  at  once 

r 

overcome  the  effect  of  the  deep-rooted  and  heinous  sin 
of  which  they  have  been  guilty  (Hag.  2: 10-14).  But  he 
assures  them  that  the  longed-for  change  will  immediately 
come  (Hag.  2:15-19),  and  that  their  leader  Zerubbabel 
shall  rule  over  them  as  messianic  prince  (Hag.  2:20-23). 


190  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

108.  The  message  of  Zechariah. — Zechariah  was  one 
with  Haggai  in  all  his  activity  and  message.  He  firmly 
believed  that  obedience  to  Yahweh  meant  success  and 
prosperity  and  that  disobedience  was  responsible  for 
the  punishment  and  exile  of  his  people.  He  calls  atten¬ 
tion  to  the  preaching  of  the  great  prophets  and  shows 
how  recent  history  has  verified  it  (Zech.  1:2-6).  He 
emphasizes  the  ethical  element  in  the  preaching  of  the 
former  prophets  who  demanded  justice,  mercy,  com¬ 
passion,  and  kindness  to  the  poor  (7:8-10);  and  he 
insists  upon  these  same  virtues  as  prerequisite  to 
the  coming  of  the  Messiah  (8: 16  f.).  He  recognizes  the 
need  of  divine  aid  to  prepare  Judah  for  the  coming  of 
the  messianic  age  and  so  describes  in  figurative  terms 
the  cleansing  process  that  shall  purge  all  wickedness 
out  of  the  land  (Zech.  5:1-11).  But  the  bulk  of  his 
preaching  is  devoted  to  promises  to  Jewry  and  to  kindling 
the  hopes  of  his  people  to  white  heat.  Prosperity  is  at 
hand;  the  temple  will  be  finished;  and  Jerusalem  is  to 
be  rebuilt  (Zech.  1:7-17).  Foreign  foes  are  to  meet 
with  well-merited  defeat  and  destruction  and  the  city 
of  Jerusalem  is  to  overflow  with  population  (Zech. 
2:1-9).  The  exiles  should  return  home,  for  Yahweh  is 
aroused  to  aid  his  people  and  will  henceforth  dwell  with 
them  and  protect  them,  while  many  nations  will  join 
Yahweh  and  his  people  and  accept  their  leadership 
(Zech.  2:10-13;  8:20-23).  The  iniquity  of  Judah  is 
pardoned  and  the  long-expected  Messiah  is  near  at  hand 
(Zech.  3:1-10).  These  things  are  to  be  brought  about 
not  by  physical  force  but  by  the  spiritual  power  of 
Yahweh,  who  through  his  messianic  priest  and  king  will 
rule  over  ah  (Zech.  4:1-6#,  10 6,  n,  13;  and  4:66-10#). 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 


I9I 

109.  The  messianic  hope. — The  most  striking  thing 
about  the  ministry  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah  is  the  fact 
that  they  regarded  Zerubbabel,  their  own  contemporary 
governor,  as  the  man  destined  to  be  the  Messiah.  They 
actually  went  so  far  as  to  place  the  messianic  crown 
upon  his  head  (Zech.  6: 9-13). 1  This  act  shows  how 
genuinely  in  earnest  these  prophets  were  in  thei^-preach- 
ing.  They  had  no  doubt  about  their  message.  To  do 
a  thing  like  that  almost  certainly  would  arouse  the 
antagonism  of  the  Persian  government,  which  would 
speedily  learn  of  this  seditious  movement.  The  result 
would  be  fatal  to  Jewish  hopes  for  the  time  being.  It  is 
perhaps  significant  that  after  the  preaching  of  Haggai 
and  Zechariah  there  was  a  period  of  quiescence,  generally 
known  as  “the  sixty  years  of  silence.” 

Zechariah  closes  his  preaching  with  a  picture  of  the 
prosperity  awaiting  Jerusalem  in  the  messianic  age. 
The  city  will  be  famous  for  its  truth.  Old  people  will 
be  seen  upon  its  streets.  Boys  and  girls  will  fill  its 
thoroughfares.  Exiles  will  come  flocking  to  it  from  all 
quarters.  Whereas  prior  to  the  building  of  the  temple 
there  was  no  peace  nor  prosperity,  now  all  nature  will 

1  Zech.  6:9-13  has  undergone  some  change  from  its  original  form. 
As  the  text  now  stands  it  is  Joshua  that  is  crowned.  But  the  passage 
becomes  more  intelligible  if  Zerubbabel  be  given  the  crown.  With  the 
aid  of  the  Septuagint  we  may  translate  vss.  n  ff.  as  follows:  “Take 
silver  and  gold  and  make  a  crown  and  set  it  upon  the  head  of  Zerubbabel; 
and  say  unto  them,  Thus  says  Yahweh  of  hosts:  Behold  a  man,  whose 
name  is  Branch,  and  he  will  branch  forth  from  where  he  stands,  and  he 
will  build  the  temple  of  Yahweh;  and  he  will  bear  glory;  and  he  will 
sit  upon  his  throne  and  rule;  and  a  priest  will  be  at  his  right  hand;  and 
there  will  be  peaceful  counsel  between  the  two  of  them.  And  the  crown 
shall  be  for  Helem,  etc.”  The  other  passages  showing  that  the  messianic 
hope  centered  in  Zerubbabel  are  Hag.  2:23;  Zech.  3:8;  4:6-10. 


192 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


combine  to  bless  Judah.  The  purpose  of  Yahweh 
toward  his  land  and  people  is  good,  provided  they  do 
but  love  truth  and  peace.  The  renown  of  Judah  will 
become  world- wide  and  people  from  every  nation  will 
seek  to  attach  themselves  to  her  people  because  of  the 
evidence  that  God  is  with  them  (Zech.  8:1-23). 

no.  The  prophet  Malachi  was  one  of  the  first  to  break 
the  sixty  years  of  silence.  He  spoke  about  the  middle  of 
the  fifth  century  b.c.,  probably  just  before  the  appearance 
of  Nehemiah  at  Jerusalem.1  His  task  was  essentially 
the  same  as  that  of  his  predecessors.  He  had  to  explain 
why  Yahweh  had  so  long  delayed  his  coming  and  he  must 
also  revive  an  almost  dead  faith  in  Yahweh  and  his 
purpose  to  bless  his  nation.  The  zeal  called  forth  by 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  had  rapidly  cooled.  The  reaction 
from  the  enthusiasm  that  had  built  the  temple  was 
violent.  The  conditions  now  were  just  as  forbidding 
and  unpromising  as  they  had  ever  been.  All  Judah’s 
labor  and  sacrifice  were  apparently  in  vain.  The  people 
were  discouraged  and  dejected.  Many  of  them  were 
ready  to  abandon  Yahweh  just  as  he  had  abandoned 
them.  They  were  saying,  what  is  the  use  of  worshiping 
Yahweh?  It  does  not  pay  to  be  pious.  Yahweh  has 
no  interest  in  justice  and  righteousness.  Malachi  says, 

You  have  made  Yahweh  weary  by  your  statements. 

Yet  you  say,  How  have  we  made  him  weary  ? 

In  that  you  say,  Every  one  that  does  evil  is  good  in  the 
eyes  of  Yahweh,  and  in  them  he  takes  pleasure 
[Mai.  2:17]. 

1  On  the  date  of  Malachi,  see  my  commentary  in  the  “  International 
Critical  Series”  (1912);  Driver  (Century  Bible,  1906);  George  Adam  Smith 
(Expositor’s  Bible,  1898);  Nowack  {Handkommentar  zum  Alten  Testament f 
3d  ed.,  1922);  Marti  (Kurzer  Hand-commentar  zum  Alten  Testament,  1904); 
C.H.  Comil ^{Introduction  to  the  Canonical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament ,  1907) 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 


193 


And  again: — “You  say,  ‘It  is  useless  to  serve  God,  and 
what  profit  is  it  that  we  have  kept  his  charge  and  that 
we  have  walked  in  mourning  before  Yahweh  of  hosts? 
And  now1 — we  are  deeming  the  arrogant  fortunate; 
yea,  the  doers  of  wickedness  are  built  up;  yea,  they 
test  God  and  escape’  ”  (Mai.  3:14,  15). 

The  value  of  piety  is  here  quite  frankly  put  upon  a 
commercial  basis.  Piety  ought  to  pay;  but  it  does  not 
pay;  why  then  be  pious?  Malachi  accepts  this  valua¬ 
tion  of  piety.  It  is  his  own  philosophy  of  life  as  much 
as  that  of  his  listeners.  He  has  no  other  ethical  or 
religious  theory  or  program.  This  was  a  terribly  hard 
doctrine  to  live  by  in  that  period.  The  material  and 
tangible  rewards  of  life  were  passing  Judah  by  con¬ 
sistently.  But  Malachi  and  similarly  minded  prophets 
never  thought  of  changing  their  theory  to  fit  the  facts 
or  of  supplementing  the  theory  with  any  new  amend¬ 
ments  or  modifications.  Malachi  fell  back  upon  two 
old  methods  of  meeting  the  problem,  the  same  methods 
that  Haggai  and  Zechariah  had  employed. 

hi.  The  argument  of  Malachi. — Malachi  first  cleared 
out  of  the  way  the  charge  that  Yahweh  did  not  love  his 
people.  His  method  of  refutation  is  noteworthy.  He 
brings  forward  as  the  most  convincing  proof  possible  of 
Yahweh’s  love  the  fact  that  Edom  has  recently  suffered 
a  terrible  disaster.  This,  of  course,  reveals  the  state  of 
mind  of  Judah  toward  her  Eastern  neighbor.  She  hates 
Edom  with  a  deadly  hatred.  If  Yahweh  has  brought 
Edom  low,  what  better  evidence  could  Judah  desire  of 
his  love  for  herself?  Does  he  not  hate  Edom  even  as 
she  does  ?  Is  he  not  therefore  Judah’s  friend  ?  The 
treatment  of  Judah  by  Edom  at  the  time  of  Judah’s 


194 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


great  disaster  furnished  the  ground  for  this  spirit  of 
revenge.  Precisely  the  same  attitude  is  taken  in  the 
little  Book  of  Obadiah,  where  the  cause  is  explicitly  stated 
(Obad.  io  ff.),  and  a  soul -satisfying  revenge  is  assured 
to  Judah  (vss.  15-18).  In  Isaiah,  chapter  63,  Edom 
is  looked  upon  in  the  same  way  and  a  paean  of  triumph 
is  lifted  up  over  her  anticipated  overthrow.  A  bitterness 
of  spirit  like  that  cannot  be  kept  in  an  air-tight  compart¬ 
ment;  it  spreads  over  the  whole  personality  and  more 
or  less  vitiates  the  whole  being. 

But  if  Yahweh  really  loves  his  people,  why  does  he 
permit  her  to  suffer  so  long  and  so  terribly?  What  a 
strange  sort  of  love  that  is!  To  this  Malachi  rejoins 
that  the  sins  of  Judah  have  abundantly  justified  all  the 
harsh  treatment  she  has  received  and  is  still  receiving. 
Prosperity  is  the  reward  of  piety,  not  of  wickedness. 
Judah  has  not  honored  Yahweh  (1:6).  Her  priests 
have  failed  in  the  discharge  of  their  duties;  they  have 
been  careless  and  indifferent  in  the  conduct  of  the 
ritual;  and  they  have  shown  favoritism  in  the  adminis¬ 
tration  of  the  law  (2:2-9).  In  addition  to  these  ritual¬ 
istic  offenses,  Malachi  denounces  with  deep  feeling  the 
sin  of  divorce  (Mai.  2:10-16).  This  was  apparently  a 
quite  common  practice  then  as  now.  Malachi  empha¬ 
sizes  two  aspects  of  it  as  radically  wrong:  first,  the  fact 
that  Hebrew  women  who  had  been  married  in  their  youth 
were  cast  off  when  old  and  helpless  and  left  to  shift  for 
themselves.  The  tears  and  cries  of  these  deserted  women 
come  up  before  God  and  drown  out  all  the  appeals  of 
sinful  Judah.  Second,  Jewish  men  are  marrying  foreign 
women.  It  may  well  be  that  the  divorces  were  often 
preparatory  to  such  new  alliances.  These  marriages 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 


195 


are  an  unpardonable  offense  in  Yahweh’s  eyes.  The 
blood  of  Judah  and  the  religion  of  Yahweh  should  be  kept 
pure,  free  from  contamination  with  alien  and  corrupting 
influences.1  Malachi’s  opposition  to  divorce  is  therefore 
based  on  two  grounds;  it  is  both  religiously  and  ethically 
wrong.  This  is  the  only  outspoken  and  clear  condemna¬ 
tion  of  divorce  per  se  in  the  Old  Testament.2 

The  sin  of  Judah  being  so  blatant,  a  process  of  puri¬ 
fication  must  be  gone  through  with  before  there  can 
be  any  restoration  of  prosperity.  To  this  end  Yahweh 
is  coming  in  judgment  to  cleanse  Judah,  ‘Tike  a  refiner’s 
fire  and  fuller’s  soap.”  This  purificatory  work  will  start 
at  the  temple  with  the  priesthood,  but  it  will  extend 
throughout  the  population  and  will  purge  away  all 
moral  wrongs.  These  are  listed  as  sorcery,  adultery, 
perjury,  and  oppression  of  the  poor  and  weak  (Mai. 
3:1-6).  Special  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  necessity  of 
paying  the  tithes  (3:7-11).  Yahweh  can  hardly  be 
expected  to  pour  out  blessings  upon  his  people  when 
they  are  remiss  and  delinquent  in  their  obligations  to 

1  Malachi’s  denunciation  of  the  marriage  of  foreign  wives  is  treated 
by  C.  C.  Torrey  ( Journal  of  Biblical  Literature,  XVII  [1898],  1-15),  as 
an  attack  upon  the  evils  of  apostasy  from  the  religion  of  Yahweh  to  a 
foreign  cult.  See  my  commentary,  ad  loc. 

2  In  early  Israel  divorce  was  the  exclusive  privilege  of  the  husband 
and  was  permissible  on  slight  provocation.  The  Deuteronomic  law 
(24: 1  ff.)  put  certain  obstacles  in  the  way  in  that  it  required  a  written 
statement  ( =  a  bill  of  divorcement)  to  be  given  the  wife  by  the  husband 
and  it  prohibited  the  remarriage  of  the  divorced  woman  to  the  first 
husband  in  case  she  should  have  married  again  and  been  made  a  widow 
again  by  death  or  by  divorce.  Divorce  was  absolutely  denied  in  two 
cases:  (1)  when  a  man  had  been  forced  to  marry  a  virgin  whom  he  had 
seduced  (Deut.  22:29)  and  (2)  when  a  husband  had  slandered  his  newly 
married  wife  (Deut.  22:19).  These  were  ameliorating  provisions;  but 
the  initiative  in  divorce  always  remained  with  the  husband. 


196  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


him.  If  they  perform  their  moral  and  religious  duty  to 
the  full,  Yahweh  will  not  fail  to  reward  them  abundantly. 

1 12.  The  final  word  of  Malachi,  as  of  his  immediate 
predecessors,  was  a  promise  of  the  dawn  of  the  new  age. 
It  is  significant  of  his  point  of  view  that  he  describes 
this  as  the  rising  of  the  “sun  of  righteousness  with  heal¬ 
ing  in  its  wings”  (Mai.  4:2).  The  word  “righteousness” 
here  as  in  Isaiah,  chapters  40-55,  has  the  special  mean¬ 
ing  of  “vindication.”  The  content  of  the  term  is  clearly 
indicated  in  the  context  (3 : 1 6 — 4 : 3) .  There  is  to  be  a  day 
of  judgment  at  the  opening  of  the  messianic  era.  The 
good  and  the  bad  are  to  receive  their  respective  dues.  The 
good  will  be  granted  a  blessed  triumph  over  the  wicked, 
whose  overthrow  is  depicted  as  extermination  by  fire  and 
as  being  trampled  under  foot  of  the  righteous.  This  is 
Malachi’s  method  of  justifying  the  ways  of  God  to  man.1 

1 13.  The  same  two  fundamental  notes  appear  in  Isaiah, 
chapters  56— 66.2  These  chapters  come  from  the  same 
period  in  general  as  Malachi,  though  they  are  probably 
not  all  from  the  same  time  or  the  same  author.  The 
problem  treated  is  still  the  same.  And  the  prophetic 
diagnosis  is  the  same.  The  delay  in  the  manifestation 
of  Yah  welds  favor  and  the  consequent  continuation  of 
the  period  of  suffering  find  justification  in  the  sins  of 
Judah.  A  dark  picture  is  painted  of  contemporary 

1  The  reference  to  the  “wings”  of  the  sun  recalls  the  fact  that  the 
common  symbol  of  the  sun  and  the  sun-god  in  Egypt,  Assyria,  Babylonia, 
and  Persia  was  a  winged  disk.  The  same  symbolism  apparently  pene¬ 
trated  into  Judah. 

2  On  the  reasons  for  placing  these  chapters  in  this  general  period,  see 
the  commentaries  of  O.  C.  Whitehouse,  Isaiah ,  II  (Century  Bible,  1908), 
225-38;  J.  Skinner  (Cambridge  Bible,  1917);  G.  W.  Wade  (Westminster 
Commentaries,  1911);  B.  T)ahm(Handkommentar  zum  Alten  Testament ,  3d 
ed.,  1914) ;  K.  Marti  ( Kurzer  Hand-commentar  zum  Alten  Testament ,  1904). 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 


197 


conditions.  The  rulers  of  Judah  are  blind  and  dumb; 
they  have  no  insight  into  the  situation;  they  are  fatu¬ 
ously  optimistic  and  careless  of  tomorrow;  they  are  a 
prey  to  laziness,  greed,  and  sensuousness  (Isa.  56:10-12). 
Nobody  heeds  the  fact  that  the  righteous  are  perishing 
or  recognizes  that  they  are  better  off  dead  than  alive 
(Isa.  57:1,  2).  Sorcery,  harlotry,  and  adultery  are  rife; 
falsehood  is  universal;  and  children  are  being  offered 
up  as  sacrificial  victims  (Isa.  57:3-5).  Murder,  theft, 
evil-speaking,  and  perjury  are  the  order  of  the  day 
(Isa.  59 : 3-8).  There  seems  to  be  no  faithful  administra¬ 
tion  of  justice  or  regard  for  truth ;  iniquity  stalks  abroad 
unrebuked  (Isa.  59:9-15).  And  yet  the  very  men  who 
do  these  things  are  most  scrupulous  in  their  outer 
conformity  to  the  claims  of  religion  (Isa.  58:2  f.). 

This  period  of  moral  chaos  and  evil  is  at  an  end. 
The  Messianic  age  is  at  the  door.  Let  Judah  prepare 
itself  for  the  coming  day  (Isa.  56:1).  The  prerequisites 
of  the  messianic  kingdom  are  compounded  of  ritualistic 
and  moral  elements.  Justice  and  righteousness  are 
indispensable  (Isa.  60:17,  18,  21;  61:8).  So  also  is 
the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  (Isa.  56:2;  58:13). 

Humility  of  spirit  and  a  contrite  heart  insure  Yahweh’s 
abiding  presence  (Isa.  57:15).  The  pious  will  do  away 
with  all  forms  of  oppression,  feed  the  hungry,  house  the 
homeless  poor,  and  clothe  the  naked.  This  is  real  religion 
(Isa.  58:3-10).  The  doing  of  such  things  will  insure  a 
glorious  future. 

1 14.  The  attitude  toward  the  non-Jewish  people  is  not 
unified.  In  chapter  56  there  is  a  remarkable  breadth 
of  spirit  shown,  an  all-inclusive  charity.  Even  aliens 
and  eunuchs  are  welcomed  into  the  fellowship  of  Yah- 


198  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

weh’s  worship  and  assured  that  they  shall  not  be  dis¬ 
criminated  against  (Isa.  56:3  ff.),  while  of  the  temple 
it  is  said,  “My  house  shall  be  called  a  house  of  prayer 
for  all  peoples”  (Isa.  56:7). 

On  the  other  hand  there  is  a  Jewish  prejudice  against 
foreigners  that  rises  into  a  bitter  hatred  in  chapter 
63.  Yahweh  is  about  to  repay  fury  to  his  adversaries 
occupying  the  islands  of  the  sea  (Isa.  59:18).  The 
nation  that  will  not  serve  Israel  shall  utterly  perish 
(Isa.  60:12).  The  nations  will  honor  Yah  weh’s  people 
and  come  flocking  to  them  from  every  quarter,  ready  to 
minister  unto  their  needs  in  every  way.  The  children 
of  Judah’s  oppressors  will  come  cringing  before  the  Jews 
(Isa.  60:14-16);  and  strangers  will  cultivate  their  fields 
and  herd  their  flocks  (Isa.  61:5).  The  future  Israel, 
after  all  the  wicked  and  apostate  element  has  been 
purged  out  of  her  (Isa.  65:8-12),  is  to  be  crowned  with 
every  blessing.  These  rewards  are  of  a  very  tangible 
sort.  They  include  abundance  of  food  and  drink,  joy  of 
heart,  long  life,  permanent  possession  of  their  habita¬ 
tion,  and  universal  peace  extending  even  to  the  animal 
world  (Isa.  65:14-25).  The  wealth  of  the  world  shall 
flow  into  the  lap  of  Judah  (Isa.  66:12).  Piety  brings 
prosperity  with  a  vengeance.  The  spiritual  and  the  ma¬ 
terial  worlds  are  closely  interrelated  and  the  ethical  and 
ritual  aspects  of  religion  are  equally  important  (Isa. 
56:2).  We  are  still  on  Ezekiel’s  platform. 

1 1 5.  Zechariah ,  chapters 9-14 ,  marks  no  advance  in  eth¬ 
ical  theory  or  practice.1  It  perpetuates  the  bitter  spirit 

1  For  the  date  of  these  chapters,  see  H.  G.  Mitchell  {International 
Critical  Commentary ,  1912);  K.  Marti,  Das  Dodekapropheton  (1904); 
W.  Nowack,  Die  kleine  Propheten  (3d  ed.,  1922). 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 


199 


of  the  past  toward  foreigners.  It  comforts  Judah  by 
promising  her  vengeance  upon  Tyre,  Sidon,  Syria,  and 
Philistia  (Zech.  9:1-8).  All  her  enemies  are  to  be 
overthrown  by  Yahweh  (Zech.  12:1-9).  The  nations 
that  survive  will  come  up  to  Jerusalem  on  pilgrimage  to 
worship  and  celebrate  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  If  they 
should  fail  to  come,  the  heavens  would  withhold  rain 
from  their  fields,  except  that  in  Egypt,  which  has  no  rain, 
a  failure  of  the  Nile  will  bring  about  the  punitive  famine 
(Zech.  14:16-19).  There  is  not  a  trace  of  the  generous 
spirit  of  Deutero-Isaiah  and  Isaiah,  chapter  56. 

1 16.  Nehemiah?  s  reform. — At  this  point  we  may  well 
consider  the  moral  element  in  Nehemiah’s  reform  move¬ 
ment.  This  movement  is  described  in  the  Books  of 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  These  books  as  they  stand  are 
the  work  of  the  Chronicler,  the  same  editorial  hand  that 
gave  us  the  Books  of  Chronicles.  But  the  nature  of  the 
original  reform  spirit  is  fairly  obvious,  notwithstanding 
the  Chronicler’s  handling  of  the  narrative.1  Nehemiah 
was  a  pious  Jew  who  held  the  high  office  of  the  king’s 
cupbearer  at  the  Persian  court  (Neh.  1:11).  His  soul 
was  troubled  by  the  tidings  that  came  to  him  from 
Judah  of  the  bad  state  of  affairs  existing  there.  There¬ 
fore,  he  obtained  leave  of  absence  from  the  king  and  went 
to  Jerusalem  in  person  to  see  what  could  be  done.  He 
found  the  walls  of  the  city  still  lying  in  ruins,  though 
nearly  a  century  had  passed  since  Cyrus  had  issued 

1  For  the  discussion  of  the  literary  problem  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah, 
see  the  standard  Introductions  by  Driver,  Gray,  Cornill,  Bewer,  and 
Steuernagel,  and  the  commentaries  of  L.  W.  Batten  (“International 
Critical  Series,”  1913);  A.  Bertholet,  Die  Biicher  Esra  und  Nehemiah 
(1902);  C.  C.  Torrey,  Ezra  Studies  (1910);  T,  Witton  Davies  (Century 
Bible,  1914);  H.  E.  Ryle  (Cambridge  Bible,  1893). 


200 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


his  decree  permitting  the  exiles  to  return  home  if  they 
would.  Not  only  so  but  the  city  population  was  pitiably 
reduced  and  the  Jews  were  currying  favor  with  their 
neighbors  from  Philistia,  Moab,  Ammon,  Edom,  Samaria, 
and  Arabian  tribes  to  the  detriment  of  their  own  spiritual 
welfare.  Nehemiah  set  himself  at  once  to  the  task  of 
organizing  the  population  for  the  work  of  rebuilding  the 
city  walls,  a  task  which  he  finally  completed  in  the  face 
of  all  sorts  of  difficulties  and  opposition.  Then  it 
became  necessary  to  provide  an  adequate  population 
for  the  occupation  and  defense  of  the  city;  and  this  was 
accomplished  by  drafting  members  of  the  rural  popula¬ 
tion  for  this  service  (Neh.  ii:i,  2).  A  further  step  in 
this  reconstruction  program  was  the  prohibition  of 
marriages  between  the  Jewish  population  and  its  various 
neighbors  (Neh.  10:30;  13:23-27).  This  was  of  course 
a  very  radical  step,  giving  rise  to  much  bitterness  of 
spirit,  especially  as  it  involved  the  breaking-up  of 
families  already  constituted  upon  an  interclan  basis. 
But  the  spirit  that  lay  behind  the  reform  was  indomit¬ 
able.  It  insisted  upon  a  pure-blooded  Jewry  and  it  was 
equally  strenuous  upon  the  necessity  of  a  pure  Yahweh 
cultus.  In  this  program,  the  narrow,  particularistic, 
exclusive  attitude  was  fastened  upon  Judaism;  and  all 
approach  to  a  sympathetic  appreciation  of  the  good  in 
non- Jewish  systems  and  peoples  was  cut  off.  The  Jew 
became  officially  narrow  minded. 

1 17.  Wrongs  righted. — While  this  program  of  activi¬ 
ties  was  being  carried  through  by  Nehemiah,  certain 
wrongs  were  being  righted.  In  Neh.  5:1-13,  we  read 
that  the  common  people  engaged  in  the  work  of 
reconstruction  made  loud  protest  against  their  treatment 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 


201 


by  the  rich.  The  lands  of  the  poor  and  even  their  persons 
were  being  seized  for  debts  overdue,  the  failure  to  pay 
being  in  part,  at  least,  due  to  the  fact  that  the  debtors 
were  engaged  in  work  for  the  public  welfare  and  so  were 
neglecting  their  own  interests.  Nehemiah  was  able  to 
prevail  upon  the  rich  to  forego  their  rights  in  view  of  the 
circumstances.  Still  further,  the  regular  remission  of  debts 
in  the  seventh  year  was  re-established  and  all  trading  upon 
the  Sabbath  was  prohibited  (Neh.  10:31;  13:19-22). 

1 18.  Nehemiah? s  personal  conduct  during  this  period 
of  reconstruction,  the  first  stage  of  which  extended  over 
twelve  years,  was  of  a  most  public-spirited  kind.  He 
devoted  himself  with  unremitting  zeal  to  the  public 
good.  He  spared  neither  time,  labor,  nor  money.  He 
puts  on  record  the  fact  that  he  refrained  from  using  the 
public  funds  that  were  at  his  lawful  disposal  as  governor 
for  the  upkeep  of  his  establishment,  because  of  his  desire 
to  lighten  the  burdens  of  taxation  upon  the  public  as 
much  as  possible.  Therefore,  he  spent  his  own  money 
and  that  freely,  keeping  a  hospitable  table  at  which  a 
large  number  of  people  were  fed  freely  (Neh.  5:14-19). 
It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Nehemiah  expected  all  of 
his  generosity  and  good  works  to  be  counted  to  his 
credit  upon  God’s  ledger.  Every  now  and  again  he 
inserts  a  brief  prayer  to  God  that  none  of  this  merit 
may  be  overlooked  (Neh.  5:19;  6:14;  13:22,  29,  31). 
He  firmly  believes  that  piety  deserves  prosperity  and 
he  keeps  careful  account  of  his  deserts. 

1 19.  The  tale  of  Ruth. — The  anti-foreign,  narrow, 
exclusive  spirit  seen  in  Isaiah,  chapter  63,  in  Zechariah, 
chapters  9-14,  and  coming  to  its  own  in  the  positive 
program  of  Nehemiah,  did  not  achieve  its  victory 


202 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


without  protest.  The  broad,  generous  spirit  of  Isaiah, 
chapters  40-55,  was  not  a  lone  voice  crying  in  the  wilder¬ 
ness.  There  were  spiritual  successors  and  heirs  of  this 
great  soul.  Two  of  these  are  represented  in  the  Books 
of  Ruth  and  Jonah.  These  books  are  most  easily 
accounted  for  as  campaign  documents  put  forth  in  an 
effort  to  check  the  progress  of  the  particularistic  and 
intolerant  spirit  that  won  out  in  Nehemiah’s  reform. 
In  any  case,  they  reveal  an  attitude  of  universality  that 
is  in  striking  contrast  to  the  prevailing  spirit  of  the  fifth 
century  b.c.  In  the  story  of  Ruth,1  the  universalistic 
point  of  view  appears  clearly  and  in  a  prominent  way. 
Ruth,  the  heroine,  is  a  Moabitish  woman  and  that  fact 
is  not  allowed  to  escape  notice  (Ruth  1:4,  22;  2:2,  6, 
11,  21;  4:5,  10).  Her  attitude  toward  her  Jewish 
widowed  mother-in-law,  Naomi,  is  from  a  Jewish  point 
of  view  simply  ideal.  She  steadfastly  refuses  to  forsake 
her  and  identifies  herself  with  her  even  to  the  extent  of 
adopting  her  God  (Ruth  1:16,  17).  Not  only  so  but 
she  is  diligent  in  looking  after  her  own  and  her  mother- 
in-law’s  material  welfare,  and  to  that  end  goes  out  to 
glean  in  the  harvest  fields  (Ruth  2:2ff.).  She  follows 
Naomi’s  admonitions  faithfully  in  every  particular  and 
wins  for  her  husband  the  rich  land-owner  Boaz.  To 
this  union  was  born  a  boy  who  became  the  grandfather 
of  David  (Ruth  4:17).  Thus  Ruth,  the  Moabitess,  was 
ancestress  of  the  great  king;  and  yet  the  Jews  would 
prohibit  and  penalize  such  marriages! 

1  The  best  commentaries  on  Ruth  are:  G.  A.  Cooke  (Cambridge 
Bible,  1913);  K.  Budde  ( Kurzer  HayuL-commentar  zum  Alien  Testament , 
1897);  and  W.  Nowack  ( Handkommentar  zum  Alten  Testament,  1900). 
See  also  the  standard  Introductions  of  Driver,  Gray,  Comill,  Bewer,  and 
Steuemagel. 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 


203 


120.  The  Book  of  Jonah 1  is  even  more  outspoken  in 
support  of  an  attitude  of  broad  sympathy  and  all- 
embracing  love  for  all  peoples.  It  would  not  exclude 
even  the  most  abhorred  of  Israel’s  foes  from  the  circle 
of  influence  of  God’s  mercy.  The  story  centers  around 
the  name  of  a  prophet  who  lived  in  the  eighth  century  b.c. 
and  prophesied  good  things  for  the  army  of  Jeroboam  II 
(II  Kings  14:25).  This  prophet  is  here  represented  as 
having  heard  the  voice  of  God  bidding  him  to  go  to 
Nineveh,  the  capital  of  Assyria,  and  preach  what  God 
shall  direct  him  to  say.  Upon  the  receipt  of  this  mission 
Jonah  straightway  turned  his  back  upon  Nineveh,  went 
aboard  a  ship  at  Joppa,  paid  his  fare,  lay  down  in  a 
remote  recess  and  fell  asleep  through  sheer  exhaustion, 
probably  due  to  the  haste  of  his  flight  from  duty.  There¬ 
upon  Yahweh  sent  a  violent  storm  upon  the  sea  so  that 
the  ship  was  like  to  sink.  The  sailors  first  of  all,  panic- 
stricken,  pray  to  their  various  gods;  then  they  set  them¬ 
selves  to  lightening  the  ship;  but  to  no  avail,  and  the 
storm  increases  in  fury.  Hereupon  the  captain  discovers 
the  sleeping  Jonah,  arouses  him,  and  urges  him  to  pray  to 
his  God.  Jonah  tells  why  this  terrible  storm  has  arisen 
and  bids  the  crew  to  throw  him  overboard  that  the  sea 
may  become  calm.  This  is  the  only  bit  of  generosity 
attributed  to  Jonah  throughout  the  tale.  The  alien 
sailors  are  not  willing  to  sacrifice  even  a  Jew  in  this  way, 
and  they  strive  strenuously  to  bring  the  ship  back  to 
land,  but  without  success.  Then  they  take  Jonah  at 
his  word  and  hurl  him  into  the  sea,  with  many  misgivings, 

1  The  best  commentaries  on  Jonah  are:  J.  A.  Bewer  (. International 
Critical  Commentary,  1912);  George  Adam  Smith  (Expositor’s  Bible, 
1898);  W.  Nowack  {Handkommentar  zum  Alien  Testament,  3d  ed.,  1922); 
K.  Marti  {Kurzer  Hand-commentar  zum  Alien  Testament,  1904). 


204 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


and  the  sea  at  once  ceases  its  violence.  This  scene  ends 
with  the  pagan  sailors  acknowledging  the  power  of  the 
Hebrew  God,  offering  sacrifices,  and  making  vows  to 
Yahweh  to  be  paid  when  they  get  ashore.  So  these 
foreigners  appear  in  much  better  light  than  the  Hebrew 
Jonah  thus  far  (Jonah  1:1-16). 

Meantime  Jonah  has  been  swallowed  by  a  huge  fish,1 
which  Yahweh  had  prepared  and  brought  ready  to  the 
spot.  In  the  interior  of  this  fish  Jonah  comes  to  his 
senses,  and  prays  to  Yahweh.  Thereupon,  the  fish 
takes  him  ashore,  where  he  is  once  more  bidden  to  go 
and  preach  to  Nineveh.  This  time  he  obeys  and  travels 
to  that  city,  where  he  goes  up  and  down  the  streets 
proclaiming  the  destruction  of  the  city  within  forty  days. 
The  entire  city  betakes  itself  to  mourning  and  fasting, 
from  the  king  upon  his  throne  to  the  very  animals  in 
the  streets,  all  alike  being  clothed  in  sackcloth.  This 
is  an  expression  of  their  repentant  desire  to  placate 
Yahweh  and  escape  his  just  wrath.  The  second  scene 
thus  closes  with  the  heathen  city  turning  from  the  error 
of  its  ways  and  seeking  the  true  God,  the  God  of  Israel. 
(Jonah  2:1 — 3:9). 

The  cry  of  the  city  was  heeded  by  God  and  he 
refrained  from  carrying  out  his  fell  purpose.  But  Jonah 
was  exceedingly  angry  at  this  turn  of  affairs  and  up¬ 
braided  Yahweh,  saying  that  he  had  suspected  this  from 
the  start  and  therefore  had  been  unwilling  to  undertake 
the  mission.  What  is  life  worth  to  a  discredited  prophet  ? 

1  The  Hebrew  says  nothing  about  a  whale;  it  is  rather  “a  great 
fish,”  made  by  Yahweh  for  the  especial  purpose  of  housing  Jonah  and 
transporting  him  to  land.  The  size  of  a  whale’s  throat  is  therefore  not 
an  element  that  needs  to  be  considered  from  any  point  of  view. 


THE  RETURN  TO  REALITY 


205 


Jonah  then  went  out  of  the  city  and  sat  himself  down 
sullenly  to  see  what  Yahweh  might  yet  do  to  the  city. 
But  the  terrific  heat  of  the  tropical  sun  beat  down  upon 
his  head,  and  so  the  good  God  prepared  a  gourd  which 
came  up  over  night  and  furnished  grateful  shade  and 
protection.  But  no  sooner  did  Jonah  begin  to  enjoy 
the  relief  thus  provided  than  God  prepared  a  worm  which 
killed  the  gourd.  To  make  matters  worse,  God  prepared 
a  sultry  sirocco-like  east  wind,  which,  together  with  the 
blazing  sun,  made  life  intolerable.  To  Jonah’s  protest 
and  lament,  Yahweh  replied: 

Thou  hast  had  pity  on  the  gourd,  for  which  thou  has  not 
laboured,  neither  didst  thou  make  it  grow,  which  came  up  in  a 
night,  and  perished  in  a  night;  and  should  not  I  have  pity  upon 
Nineveh,  that  great  city,  wherein  are  more  than  one  hundred 
and  twenty  thousand  persons  who  cannot  discern  between  their 
right  hand  and  their  left  hand,1  and  also  much  cattle  [Jonah 
3:10-4:11]? 

There  is  no  possible  answer  but  an  affirmative  to 
such  a  question,  from  any  broad  human  point  of  view. 
It  boldly  challenges  one  to  deny  that  the  heart  of  God 
is  at  least  as  merciful  and  tender  as  that  of  a  normal  man. 
Will  the  good  God  treat  his  children  with  less  considera¬ 
tion  than  an  earthly  father  ?  It  puts  all  human  beings 
alike  upon  the  same  level  as  objects  of  the  divine  care. 
It  refuses  to  discriminate  against  any  people  in  an 
inhuman  way.  The  story  is  an  allegory  with  a  very 
direct  bearing  upon  the  problems  of  the  latter  part  of 
the  fifth  century  in  Judah.  Jonah  represents  the 
narrow-minded,  nationalistic  Israel  that  prior  to  the  Exile 
had  failed  in  performing  its  God-given  function  in  the 

1  These  are,  of  course,  very  young  infants. 


206 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


world.  Then  they  were  thrown  into  captivity  and  exile 
until  they  came  to  some  realization  of  their  shortcomings 
in  the  sight  of  Yahweh.  They  had  been  given  another 
chance  after  the  Exile  to  make  the  riches  of  Yahweh’s 
grace  known  to  humanity  at  large.  But  they  had  done 
this,  if  at  all,  in  a  reluctant  and  half-hearted,  indeed  a 
sullen  spirit.  Now  when  they  ought  to  be  acting  as 
missionaries  to  the  whole  world,  they  are  putting  up 
barriers  between  themselves  and  that  world  and  striving 
to  exclude  the  latter  from  all  contact  with  Jewry  and 
knowledge  of  the  ways  of  the  true  God.  The  book  is  a 
plea  for  a  wide-open  Jewry,  for  a  breadth  of  spirit  which 
shall  recognize  all  men  as  children  of  God.  It  is  a  protest 
against  the  exclusive  and  partisan  spirit  which  tempo¬ 
rarily  prevailed.  It  is  a  worthy  successor  to  and  heir 
of  the  spirit  of  the  great  unknown  prophet  of  the  Exile. 


CHAPTER  X 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  JEWS 

1 2 1.  The  Assouan  papyri. — In  the  years  1904  to 
1907,  the  interest  of  the  world  of  biblical  scholarship 
was  kept  agog  by  news  of  discoveries  of  Aramaic  papyri 
on  the  island  of  Elephantine  in  the  River  Nile.  This 
island  lies  just  opposite  the  town  of  Assuan  which  is  on 
the  east  bank  of  the  river.  The  island  and  town  are  set 
right  at  the  foot  of  the  First  Cataract.  The  distance  by 
rail  from  Alexandria  to  Assuan  is  680  miles.  At  this  fron¬ 
tier  port  of  the  Persian  Empire  there  was  stationed  the 
Jewish  garrison  whose  members  wrote  these  Aramaic  doc¬ 
uments  and  left  them  for  our  learning.1  These  Jews  had 
been  there  probably  since  the  seventh  century  b.c.,  for  the 
letters  inform  us  that  when  Cambyses  invaded  Egypt  in 
525  b.c.  he  had  left  the  Jewish  temple  in  Assuan  un¬ 
harmed.  But  a  temple  as  elaborate  as  the  one  at  Assuan 
would  not  have  been  erected  at  once  by  a  new  colony;  it 
presupposes  the  possession  of  considerable  wealth  and  an 
assured  feeling  of  continuity  of  residence  in  the  community. 

These  Aramaic  documents  are  of  inestimable  value 
for  historical  purposes.  They  are  contemporary  writings 

1  These  papyri  have  been  published  by  various  scholars:  e.g.,  A.  H. 
Sayce  and  A.  E.  Cowley,  Aramaic  Papyri  Discovered  at  Assuan  (1906); 
A.  Ungnad,  Aramaische  Papyrus  aus  Elephantine  (1911).  The  standard 
text  is  that  of  Eduard  Sachau,  Aramaische  Papyrus  und  Ostraka  aus 
einer  judischen  Militar-Kolonie  zu  Elephantine  (1911).  The  best  English 
translation  is  by  Martin  Sprengling,  in  the  American  Journal  of  Theology, 
XXI  (1917),  41 1  ff . ;  XXII  (1918),  34  ff.  The  citations  of  the  papyri 
in  this  chapter  follow  the  numbering  given  them  in  Dr.  Sprengling’s 
rendering.  For  those  not  yet  translated  by  Sprengling,  the  numbers  of 
Sachau’s  publication  are  employed. 


207 


208 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


by  Jews  of  the  fifth  century  b.c.  They  are  furthermore 
representatives  of  the  most  trustworthy  type  of  docu¬ 
ment  in  that  they  are  in  large  part  private  letters  and 
business  contracts.  They  are  therefore  writings  that 
are  uncolored  by  any  motive  external  to  their  main 
purpose  and  they  have  escaped  all  processes  of  editing 
at  later  hands  which  would  have  deprived  us  of  much 
of  their  real  value.  They  represent  the  actual  practice 
and  thought  of  the  Jews  of  the  fifth  century  b.c.  We 
deal  in  them  with  actual  facts  of  the  experience  of  that 
period  and  not  with  theories  of  later  minds  about  that 
period.  They  give  us  the  point  of  view  of  the  common 
folk  of  the  period  and  an  insight  into  the  social  and 
economic  world  of  that  day  as  they  themselves  saw  it. 
In  this  connection,  we  must  not  forget  that  these  colonists 
were  mercenaries  in  the  Persian  army.  They  were 
professional,  hired  soldiers.  They  were  not  prophets, 
poets  or  priests;  they  were  members  of  the  masses.  The 
rank  and  file  of  a  professional  army  does  not  represent 
the  highest  ideals,  nor  the  practice  of  perfection.  But 
common  folk  as  they  were,  they  were  profoundly  religious 
and  spared  no  pains  nor  cost  in  the  pursuit  of  their 
religious  rights  and  the  support  of  their  temple  with  its 
ordinances. 

122.  The  Old  Testament  an  incomplete  record . — The 
papyri  make  clear  what  was  already  evident  to  the 
student,  viz.,  that  the  Old  Testament  does  not  aim  to 
be  a  complete  record  of  the  fife  of  Israel.  It  is  but  a 
fragment  of  the  literary  product  of  that  life.  Even  its 
codes  of  law  are  not  complete;  they  leave  whole  areas  of 
life’s  activities  unprovided  with  regulations.  There  was 
a  large  amount  of  law  and  ritual  that  lay  outside  of  the 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  JEWS  209 


codes  as  they  appear  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  Old 
Testament  legislation  is  to  a  great  extent  theoretical 
and  idealistic.  These  letters  and  contracts  from  Assuan 
show  us  life  and  conduct  as  it  actually  was.  If  we  could 
have  this  kind  of  a  supplementary  literature  to  the  entire 
Old  Testament,  furnishing  us  with  concrete  illustrative 
material  for  the  entire  period  covered  by  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment,  it  would  cause  the  rewriting  of  all  our  his¬ 
tories  of  Hebrew  life  and  thought. 

123.  Babylonian  influence. — These  papyri  show  the 
perpetuation  and  persistence  of  Babylonian  influence 
upon  Hebrew  and  Persian  life  in  the  fifth  century  b.c. 
Business  and  commerce  are  carried  on  according  to 
Babylonian  methods.  Every  transaction  is  recorded 
upon  a  contract  and  filed  away  for  future  reference. 
Into  this  contract  are  written  all  the  details  of  the 
transaction  with  great  care  and  the  whole  matter  is 
attested  by  the  signatures  of  witnesses.  This  kind  of 
procedure  was  in  the  interests  of  justice.  It  militated 
against  false  claims  and  deliberate  misinterpretation  of 
terms.  Everything  was  put  plainly  in  writing.  It  shows 
a  recognition  of  the  necessity  of  truthfulness  and  honest 
dealing  in  business  affairs.  True  it  is  also  an  evidence 
that  dishonesty  and  lying  were  a  common  enough  thing 
to  have  made  this  means  of  self-protection  necessary  in 

1 

the  commercial  world.  It  is  also  a  safeguard  against  the 
misunderstandings  due  to  fallible  memories. 

124.  A  typical  contract  is  here  given,  providing  for 
the  ownership  and  use  of  what  appears  to  have  been 
a  wall  between  two  houses:1 

1  This  translation  is  essentially  that  of  my  colleague,  Dr.  Martin 
Sprengling,  as  given  in  American  Journal  of  Theology,  XXII  (1918),  371-75. 


210 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


On  the  1 8th  of  Elul,  that  is  the  28th  day  of  Pachons,1  the 
15th  year  of  Xerxes  the  king,2  Qoniah,  the  son  of  Zadok,  an 
Aramaean  of  Assuan,  belonging  to  the  colors  of  Warizath,  spoke 
to  Mahseiah,  the  son  of  Jedoniah,  an  Aramaean  of  Assuan,  belong¬ 
ing  to  the  colors  of  Warizath,  as  follows:  I  came  to  thee  and  thou 
didst  give  me  the  gateway  of  thy  house  to  build  one  buttress- 
wall  [?]  there.  That  buttress-wall  [?]  which  is  attached  to  my 
house  at  its  corner  which  is  toward  the  south  shall  be  thine. 
That  buttress-wall  [  ?]  shall  adjoin  the  side  of  my  house  from  the 
ground  upwards,  from  the  corner  of  my  house  which  is  toward 
the  south  as  far  as  the  house  of  Zechariah.  Neither  tomorrow 
nor  any  later  day  shall  I  have  power  to  restrain  thee  from  building 
upon  [or  above]  this  thy  buttress-wall  [?].  If  I  should  restrain 
thee,  I  will  pay  thee  the  sum  of  ten  shekels  by  the  King’s  weights, 
pure  silver,  and  that  buttress-wall  [  ?]  shall  be  thine  nevertheless. 
And  if  Qoniah  should  die,  neither  tomorrow  nor  on  any  later  day 
shall  son  or  daughter,  brother  or  sister,  near  or  distant  relative, 
trooper  or  civilian,  have  power  to  restrain  Mahseiah  or  any 
descendant  of  his  from  building  upon  [or  above]  that  buttress- 
wall  [  ?]  of  his.  Whoever  shall  restrain  any  one  of  them  shall  pay 
to  him  the  sum  which  is  written  above,  and  the  buttress- wall  [  ?] 
shall  be  thine  nevertheless,  and  thou  shalt  have  full  power  to 
build  upon  [or  above]  it  upwards,  and  I  Qoniah  shall  not  have 
the  right  to  say  to  Mahseiah  as  follows:  That  gateway  is  not 
thine  and  thou  shall  not  go  forth  [by  it]  into  the  street  which  is 
between  us  and  the  house  of  Pftu-neit,  the  sailor.  If  I  should 
restrain  thee,  I  will  pay  thee  the  sum  which  is  written  above, 
and  thou  shalt  have  full  power  to  open  that  gateway  and  to  go 
forth  [by  it]  into  the  street  which  is  between  us. 

Pelatiah  the  son  of  Ahio  has  written  this  deed  at  the  dictation 
of  Qoniah.  The  witnesses  thereto: 

witness  Mahseiah,  the  son  of  Isaiah; 

witness,  Satibarzanes,  the  son  of - ; 

witness,  Shemaiah,  the  son  of  Hosea; 
witness,  Pharataphernes,  the  son  of  Artaphernes ; 

1  The  date  is  given  first  according  to  the  Hebrew  calendar  and  then 
by  the  Persian  calendar;  it  represents  Sept.  12th. 

2 1.e.,  471  b.c. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  JEWS  21 1 


witness,  Baga-data,  the  son  of  Nabu-Kudurri;  Nabu-li,  the 
son  of  Drgmn;  witness,  Bubis,  the  son  of  Rehemre;  witness, 
Shalom,  the  son  of  Hoshaiah. 

This  document  shows  almost  as  much  meticulous 
care  and  attention  to  the  possibilities  that  may  arise 
as  does  a  modern  legal  instrument. 

125.  Attitude  toward  non-Jews. — Turning  to  the  direct 
and  positive  statements  of  the  papyri  themselves,  con¬ 
taining  as  they  do  the  personal  testimony  of  real  Jews, 
let  us  begin  by  observing  their  relations  with  non- Jews. 
It  will  at  once  appear  that  under  the  circumstances 
conditioning  their  existence  the  exclusive  nationalistic 
attitude  of  the  triumphant  party  in  Jerusalem  was 
impracticable  in  Elephantine  and  Assuan.  The  colonists 
were  in  the  pay  of  the  Persian  government  and  subject 
at  every  turn  to  its  orders.  Their  contact  with  the  non- 
Jewish  community  was  constant  and  continuous.  They 
conducted  business  with  Persians  and  Egyptians  freely 
and  without  repugnance.  Nor  did  the  exchange  of 
goods  end  the  communication  between  the  Jews  and  the 
non- Jews.  The  two  groups  gave  informal  hostages 
each  to  the  other  for  good  behavior,  in  that  intermarriage 
of  Jews  and  non-Jews  was  more  or  less  practiced.  The 
variation  between  the  names  of  children  and  their  fathers 
is  best  accounted  for  in  this  way.1  There  is  at  least  one 
case  in  which  a  Jew  has  a  wife  with  a  non-Jewish  name.2 

1  E.g.,  in  Papyrus  1,  lines  3  and  22,  the  Jewish  Hananiah  has  a  son 

with  the  name  Esp . ,  which  can  hardly  be  the  beginning  of  a 

Jewish  name;  in  15,  line  19,  appears  Hada-Nuri;  in  15,  line  105,  Mega- 
phemes;  in  18,  line  5,  Hanan  son  of  Pa-Khnum;  and  the  names  as  a 
whole  in  18  are  a  mixture  of  Jewish  and  Egyptian. 

2  In  Papyrus  13,  line  3.  Hosea  the  Jew  has  a  wife  called  “  ’Srsut,” 
which  is  clearly  non-Jewish. 


212 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


There  is  one  foreigner  whom  they  hate  to  the  utter¬ 
most,  viz.,  Widarnag,  who  as  a  former  military  governor 
of  Assuan  had  complied  with  the  request  of  the  priests  of 
the  Egyptian  god  Khnum  and  had  totally  destroyed  the 
Jewish  temple  in  Assuan.  This  shows  a  bitter  hostility 
between  the  Jews  and  the  Egyptian  priests,  which  was 
quite  natural,  almost  inevitable,  in  view  of  the  racial 
and  religious  differences  between  the  two  groups.  But 
Widarnag  is  the  chief  offender  and  is  spoken  of  in  no 
uncertain  terms: 

In  the  month  of  Tammuz,  the  14th  year  of  Darius  the  king,1 
when  Arsham  had  departed  and  gone  with  the  King,  the  shavelings 
of  the  god  Khnum  who  are  in  Yeb  the  fortress,2  made  a  plot  with 
Widarnag,  who  was  military  governor  here,  to  wit:  Let  the  temple 
of  Yahu  the  god  which  is  in  Yeb,  the  fortress,  be  removed  thence. 
Then  that  Widarnag,  the  accursed  [  ?],  sent  a  letter  unto  Napayan, 
his  son,  who  was  commander  at  Assuan  the  fortress,  as  follows: 
The  Temple  which  is  in  Yeb  the  fortress  shall  be  destroyed. 
Thereupon  Napayan  led  forth  the  Egyptians  and  other  troops; 
they  came  to  the  fortress  of  Yeb  with  their  implements;  they 
entered  into  that  temple;  they  razed  it  to  the  ground . 

But  when  this  had  happened  we  with  our  wives  and  children 
put  on  sackcloth  and  fasted  and  prayed  to  Yahu,  the  lord  of 
heaven:  Show  us  that  cur  Widarnag  with  his  anklets  wrenched 
from  his  feet  and  bereft  of  all  his  possessions,  and  all  the  men  who 
sought  evil  against  that  temple  slain,  so  that  we  may  look  upon 
theirs  [dead  bodies]. 

This  reminds  us  of  the  vindictiveness  of  the  Impreca¬ 
tory  Psalms;  but  the  provocation  was  exceedingly  great. 

126.  Bribery  and  deceit. — As  the  subjects  and 
employees  of  a  foreign  master,  it  may  be  taken  for 

1  That  is  in  June-July,  410  b.c. 

2  This  is  the  name  of  Elephantine  in  the  papyri. 

s  From  the  translation  of  Dr.  Martin  Sprengling  in  American 
Journal  of  Theology ,  XXI  (1917),  437  f. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  JEWS  213 


granted  that  there  would  be  occasion  for  resort  to  bribery 
and  sycophancy  for  the  attainment  of  coveted  ends;  and 
there  is  clear  evidence  that  this  sort  of  thing  was  actually 
done.  In  the  letter  sent  by  the  priests  of  the  Assuan 
temple  to  Bagoas,  the  governor,  from  which  the  passage 
quoted  above  was  taken,  Bagoas  is  not  only  assured 
that  if  he  will  use  his  influence  with  the  Egyptian  officials 
to  bring  about  the  restoration  of  the  temple  he  shall 
receive  merit  in  the  presence  of  Yahu  greater  in  amount 
“than  that  of  the  man  who  offers  burnt-offerings  and 
sacrifices  of  more  than  1000  talents  in  value,”  but  it  is 
also  intimated  that  a  substantial  quid  pro  quo  will  be 
likewise  forthcoming.1  In  Papyrus  n,  we  read  that  as 
the  Egyptians  had  given  a  bribe  the  Jews  likewise  had 
had  to  resort  to  counter  bribery.  In  Papyrus  12,  we 
are  informed  that  the  Jews  gave  to  some  official  1000 
measures  of  barley  for  the  restoration  of  their  temple 
worship.  A  necessary  resort  to  such  underground 
methods  for  obtaining  even  perfectly  proper  ends  besets 
the  whole  moral  life  of  a  community  with  peril. 

127.  Women  seem  on  the  whole  to  have  had  more 
liberty  of  action  than  the  legislation  considered  thus  far 
would  allow.  In  part,  at  least,  they  had  the  same  civil 
rights  as  men.  They  could  subscribe  in  their  own  names 
to  the  support  of  the  local  temple  of  Yahu,  as  appears 
from  the  names  in  the  subscription  list  given  in  Papyrus 
15.  They  could  make  gifts  of  money  in  their  own  right.2 

1  See  Papyrus  8,  line  28,  which  reads,  “and  as  for  the  gold,  con¬ 
cerning  this  we  have  sent  information”;  that  is,  of  course,  in  some  more 
private  way. 

2  Sachau,  No.  35.  Numbers  preceded  by  “Sachau”  are  from 
Sachau’s  standard  edition  cited  on  p.  207. 


214 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


They  could  even  borrow  money  in  their  own  names  giv¬ 
ing  such  security  as  was  satisfactory.  In  one  case 
this  security  was  in  the  shape  of  a  mortgage  upon  real 
estate  owned  by  the  debtor.1  They  could  buy,  sell,  and 
mortgage  real  estate  freely.2  Marriage  was  arranged 
by  the  father  of  the  bride;3  but  the  dowry  was  paid  by 
the  husband  to  the  bride.4 

One  of  the  most  startling  revelations  of  these  papyri 
is  the  fact  that  Yahu,  their  God,  was  provided  with  a 
female  consort.  Two  subordinate  deities  are  mentioned 
in  such  a  way  as  to  leave  no  doubt  of  their  relationship. 
In  a  list  of  gifts  to  the  local  temple  made  apparently  in 
419  b.c.  and  bearing  the  heading:  “These  are  the  names 
of  the  Jewish  army  who  gave  money  for  Yahu  the  god, 
man  for  man,  the  sum  of  two  shekels,”  there  appears 
this  summary: 

Therein  to  Yahu,  12  Keresh,  6  shekels. 

To  Ashimath-Bethel,  7  Keresh, 

To  Anath-Bethel,  12  Keresh. 

The  second  name  is  not  certainly  a  feminine  proper 
name;  it  may  equally  well  be  masculine.  But  the  third 
is  unquestionably  feminine.  We  find  the  same  goddess 
referred  to  again  as  “Anath-Yahu”  in  another  papyrus.5 
Thus  Yahu,  whom  the  Old  Testament  knows  as  Yahweh, 
is  brought  into  immediate  association  not  only  with 
subordinate  deities,  but  with  a  female  deity.6  This 

1  Sachau,  No.  30. 

2  Sachau,  Nos.  31  and  32. 

3  Sachau,  No.  39.  4  Sachau,  No.  37.  s  Sachau,  No.  32  (?). 

6  A  similar  composite  deity  is  known  to  have  been  worshiped  in 
early  Moab  under  the  name  “ Ashtar-Chemosh” ;  see  Moabite  stone,  line 
17,  as  published  by  Bennett,  The  Moabite  Stone  (1911),  pp.  31-51  f. 
The  Phoenicians  also  worshiped  a  composite  male  and  female  deity, 
named  Atargatis. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  JEWS  215 


speaks  volumes  as  to  the  character  of  the  Yahu- worship 
in  Assuan.  Not  only  so,  but  it  makes  us  take  more 
seriously  the  reference  to  sensuous  rites  at  the  temple  in 
Jerusalem  (II  Kings  23 : 7)  and  the  protest  of  the  women, 
in  Jeremiah,  chapter  52,  against  being  forbidden  to  wor¬ 
ship  the  Queen  of  heaven  as  their  predecessors  had  done. 
The  presence  of  the  sex-element  in  religion  has  always  and 
everywhere  proved  contaminating.  This  revelation  from 
Assuan  leads  us  to  take  more  literally  what  the  earlier 
prophets  had  had  to  say  about  adultery  and  harlotry. 
To  a  greater  extent  than  has  been  generally  supposed,  this 
language  has  to  be  taken  literally,  instead  of  figuratively, 
as  has  hitherto  been  the  case.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
attribution  of  deity,  though  of  an  inferior  degree,  to  a 
female,  would  to  some  extent  at  least  put  the  conception 
of  womanhood  upon  a  somewhat  higher  scale. 

128.  The  attitude  of  the  colony  toward  justice  and  its 
ways  of  conserving  the  interests  of  justice  are  well 
illustrated  in  these  papyri.  Attention  has  already  been 
called  to  the  stress  laid  upon  the  careful  preparation  of 
written  records  of  all  important  transactions  of  a  busi¬ 
ness  character  and  the  care  taken  to  put  witnesses  of  the 
bargain  on  record.  Further,  after  a  contract  was  made, 
it  was  a  legal  offense  punishable  by  heavy  fines  for  any¬ 
one  to  dispute  the  rights  therein  established.  Two  sis¬ 
ters  exchange  a  plot  of  land  that  has  been  awarded  to 
them  by  the  king’s  judge  and  by  the  commander  of  the 
army  for  some  real  estate  held  by  a  third  woman.  If 
anybody  disputes  the  right  to  the  plot  they  have  handed 
over  he  shall  pay  seven  keres  damages.1  Similarly  when 

1  Sachau,  No.  31;  similarly  also  in  Sachau,  No.  32  recording  the  pur¬ 
chase  of  property  by  a  woman. 


2l6 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


one  person  makes  a  gift  to  another  the  matter  is  recorded 
and  the  giver  binds  himself  under  penalty  never  to  ask 
the  return  of  the  gift.  A  woman  presenting  some  money 
to  her  sister  guarantees  the  sister  perpetual  possession 
of  the  gift  and  agrees  to  pay  two  keres  to  the  sister  if  she 
ever  asks  the  return  of  the  gift.1  A  man  and  woman 
bind  themselves  in  similar  fashion  never  to  ask  back  a 
gift  made  to  others  in  a  spirit  of  love.2  Such  measures 
did  not,  however,  put  a  stop  to  suits  for  the  recovery  of 
property  alleged  to  be  wrongfully  held.  One  papyrus 
seems  to  be  the  record  of  such  a  claim,  in  that  a  man 
impugns  another’s  right  to  the  possession  of  a  she-ass.3 
It  is  significant  of  the  force  of  the  God-idea  in  practical 
life  that  in  several  cases  an  oath  before  God  is  accepted 
as  settling  a  question  at  issue  in  a  legal  dispute.4  The 
fear  of  punishment  at  the  hands  of  an  outraged  deity 
was  evidently  strong  enough  to  keep  men  from  false 
swearing.  One  man  charges  another  with  having  broken 
into  his  home  and  stolen  money,  doing  violence  to  his 
wife  in  the  process,  and  he  cites  him  before  the  tribunal 
of  God  and  makes  him  take  an  oath  of  purgation  in  the 
presence  of  four  witnesses.  A  refusal  to  do  so  would  of 
course  be  treated  as  a  confession  of  guilt.  In  another 
case  a  contract  for  the  purchase  of  fish  is  made  binding 
by  an  oath  before  God.  Yet  in  one  case  a  simple  IOU, 
or  promise  to  pay,  is  accepted  as  satisfactory.  A 
husband  promised  to  pay  his  wife  by  a  certain  date  the 
balance  due  her  on  a  pre-nuptial  marriage  contract.5 

1  Sachau,  No.  35.  3  Sachau,  No.  36;  similarly  in  Sachau,  No.  38. 

3  Sachau,  No.  33. 

4  See  Sachau,  Nos.  27,  28,  34;  and  Sayce-Cowley,  B  4,  F  5. 

s  No.  14. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  JEWS  217 


The  fact  that  this  transaction  fell  within  the  limits  of 
the  family  probably  made  a  great  difference. 

One  document  seems  to  contain  fragments  of  an 
appeal  from  the  decision  of  a  judge  or  a  court  to  some 
higher  authority.1  Whether  this  authority  is  the  Persian 
Satrap  or  some  group  of  officials  or  judges  is  not  clear, 
owing  to  the  fragmentary  state  of  the  papyrus.  The 
royal  authority  was  invoked  to  settle  the  troublesome 
matter  of  square  dealing  with  weights  and  measures. 
There  was  a  royal  standard  which  determined  all  such 
questions.  In  one  document,  a  woman  named  Mib- 
tahyah  puts  on  record  that  out  of  love  she  has  given  to 
her  sister  silver  amounting  to  six  pounds  according  to 
the  king’s  weights.2 

129.  Interest  on  loans. — The  record  of  a  loan  to  a 
woman  from  a  fellow- Jew  is  of  considerable  significance. 
It  shows  that  Jews  charged  interest  upon  loans  to  fellow- 
Jews  notwithstanding  the  law  against  such  procedure 
(see  p.  137),  and  that  every  precaution  was  taken  to 
insure  the  payment  of  both  principal  and  interest,  in 
that  a  mortgage  was  taken  upon  the  entire  property  of 
the  debtor,  personal  and  real,  and  the  debtor’s  heirs  were 
held  responsible  for  the  debt  if  not  paid  before  the 
death  of  the  original  debtor.  The  body  of  the  contract 
reads  as  follows: 

Thou  hast  given  me  as  a  loan  four  shekels  of  silver,  i.e.,  four 
according  to  the  weights  of  the  king.  I  will  pay  thee  interest 
thereon  at  the  rate  of  two  hallur  per  shekel  per  month,  i.e.,  at  the 
rate  of  eight  hallur  per  month.  If  the  interest  is  added  to  the 
capital3  I  will  pay  thee  interest  upon  this  interest  even  as  upon 

1  No.  6. 

2  Sachau,  No.  35;  so  also  in  Sachau,  No.  30. 

3  I.e.,  if  I  fail  to  pay  interest  when  due. 


2l8 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  [original]  capital.  If  the  change  of  the  year  conies  and  I 
have  not  satisfied  thy  claim  to  thy  capital  and  to  the  interest 
upon  it  according  to  the  conditions  of  this  document,  then  you 
O  Meshullam,  and  your  sons  are  justified  in  seizing  as  pledge 
anything  which  thou  mayest  find  in  my  possession,  a  house  of 
brick,  silver  and  gold,  bronze  and  iron,  manservant  and  maid¬ 
servant,  barley  and  spelt  and  any  sort  of  food  which  thou  mayest 
find  in  my  possession,  until  I  have  fully  paid  thee  thy  capital 
with  interest.  And  meantime  I  shall  have  no  right  to  say  to 
thee,  “I  have  satisfied  thy  claim  to  thy  money  and  interest  upon 
it,”  so  long  as  this  document  is  in  thy  hand.  Nor  shall  I  have 
any  right  to  complain  of  thee  before  the  magistrate  and  the  judge 
by  saying,  “Thou  hast  taken  away  a  pledge  from  me,”  so  long  as 
this  document  is  still  in  thy  hand.  And  if  I  die  without  having 
satisfied  thy  claim  to  thy  money  and  the  interest  upon  it,  then 
my  sons  must  pay  thee  in  full  this  money  and  the  interest  upon 
it.  If  they,  however,  do  not  pay  thee  in  full  this  money  and  the 
interest  upon  it,  then  thou,  O  Meshullam,  hast  the  right  to  take 
to  thyself  any  food  or  pledge  which  thou  mayest  find  in  their 
possession  until  they  have  paid  thee  in  full  thy  capital  with  interest, 
while  they  will  have  no  right  to  complain  of  thee  before  the  magis¬ 
trate  and  the  judges,  so  long  as  this  document  is  still  in  thy  hands. 
If  they,  however,  go  to  court  notwithstanding,  they  shall  not 
obtain  a  judgment  so  long  as  this  document  is  still  in  thy  hand.1 

Since  the  relation  of  the  hallur  to  the  shekel  is  not 
yet  definitely  known,  the  rate  of  interest  cannot  be  cer¬ 
tainly  known.  The  most  probable  calculation,  reckoned 
upon  the  basis  of  ioo  hallur  to  the  shekel,  yields  a  rate 
of  interest  of  2  per  cent  per  month,  or  24  per  cent  per 
annum.  This  is  approximately  the  rate  known  to  have 
been  prevalent  in  the  time  of  Jerome  ( ca .  331-420  a.d.). 
It  is  evident  that  the  contracting  parties  and  witnesses 
are  not  concerned  about  the  violation  of  any  law  prohibit¬ 
ing  the  charging  of  interest.  If  they  knew  of  such  a 
law,  they  never  thought  of  taking  it  seriously.  And  the 

1  As  translated  by  Dr.  M.  Sprengling,  loc.  cit. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  JEWS  219 


nature  of  the  contract,  with  its  detailed  provision  for 
collection  of  the  interest  and  capital  and  its  references 
to  court  procedure,  shows  that  this  kind  of  transaction 
was  of  common  occurrence  and  that  the  holder  of  the 
mortgage  had  no  need  to  worry  over  the  possibility  of 
his  contract  being  annulled  by  the  judges  or  arousing 
opposition  or  hostility  on  the  part  of  the  Jewish 
community. 

130.  The  spirit  of  Judaism. — On  the  whole  the  Assuan 
Papyri  picture  a  Jewish  colony  living  on  relatively 
friendly  terms  with  its  non-Jewish  neighbors.  There  was 
no  lack  of  devotion  to  the  Hebrew  God,  Yahu,  nor  to  the 
institutions  of  Yahu,  such  as  temple-worship,  sacrifice, 
and  passover.  But  there  is  a  notable  lack  of  that 
excessively  exclusive  spirit  represented  by  legalistic 
Judaism.  Similarly  woman  seems  to  have  had  greater 
freedom  of  activity  than  was  contemplated  by  the 
existing  legislation.  She  moved  about  as  a  woman  of 
the  world  having  apparently  most  of  the  rights  granted 
to  men.  Life  as  a  whole  seems  a  very  real  thing,  carried 
on  in  its  essential  features  much  as  it  goes  on  today. 
There  is  a  natural  lack  of  exalted  idealism,  since  that 
commodity  does  not  easily  blend  with  the  business  of 
buying  and  selling  with  which  these  papyri  are  much 
concerned.  Yet  that  these  Jews  were  capable  of  sacrifice 
in  devotion  to  high  ends  is  clearly  evident  from  the  grief 
that  overwhelmed  them  when  their  temple  was  wantonly 
destroyed  and  the  measures  they  took  to  bring  about  its 
restoration.  Religion  was  to  them  something  more  than 
a  luxury;  it  was  a  vital  necessity;  and  they  were  ready 
to  deny  themselves  much  in  order  to  be  permitted  to 
satisfy  this  need  of  the  spirit. 


CHAPTER  XI 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 

13 1.  The  Psalter  as  a  hymnbook. — The  Psalter  has 
been  fitly  called  “  the  hymn  book  of  the  second  Templed’1 
This  does  not  imply  that  there  are  no  psalms  from  the 
pre-exilic  period  but  it  does  mean  that  the  bulk  of  the 
Psalter  was  written  in  the  post-exilic  age.  Not  only  so, 
but  the  Psalter  as  such  was  constructed  for  use  in  the 
Second  Temple  and  the  Psalms  were  sung  by  the  choirs 
and  worshipers  in  that  post-exilic  sanctuary.  Therefore, 
they  must  have  expressed  the  thoughts  and  satisfied  the 
needs  of  that  period. 

Hymnbooks,  however,  represent  the  thoughts  and 
feelings  of  the  average  man.  The  best  poetry  is  never 
found  in  hymnals;  the  limitations  of  space  and  of 
subject-matter  are  too  heavy  shackles  upon  the  wings  of 
poetic  imagination  to  permit  of  the  highest  flights  in 
hymnology.  The  best  Hebrew  poetry  is  in  the  Book  of 
Job.  The  same  handicap  fetters  thought.  People  go  to 
worship,  not  to  think,  but  to  pray.  A  hymnbook  that 
is  too  intellectual  is  doomed  to  failure.  A  similar  situa¬ 
tion  is  revealed  in  the  field  of  ethics.  The  best  ethics  will 
be  found  outside  of  the  Psalter.  It  is  not  a  handbook 
of  morals,  but  a  hymnbook.  It  is  on  that  account  all 
the  more  reliable  as  a  witness  upon  these  matters.  The 
data  it  presents  are  not  selected  to  bolster  up  any  theory 
or  proposition,  but  are  incidental  to  the  main  purpose  of 
the  anthology,  which  is  prayer  and  praise.  They  reveal 

1  See  the  chapter  under  this  title  in  my  Religion  of  the  Psalms  (1922). 


220 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


221 


the  mind  and  heart  of  the  Hebrew  as  no  formal  treatise 
on  morals  could  ever  do.  We  see  him  in  the  Psalter 
as  he  really  is,  devoid  of  all  pretense  and  pose. 

132.  The  “  J”  of  the  Psalmists. — One  problem  at  once 
confronts  the  interpreter  of  the  Psalms  and  that  is  the 
determination  of  the  significance  of  the  pronoun  “I,” 
which  is  so  constantly  in  evidence  throughout  the  Psalter. 
Who  is  this  that  is  continually  talking  about  himself 
and  his  sorrows?  What  individual  could  have  been 
significant  enough  to  have  imposed  the  problem  of  his 
personal  welfare  so  persistently  upon  the  consciousness 
of  the  people  ?  Or,  were  many  poets  so  gifted  as  to  be 
able  to  describe  their  own  psychological  reactions  in 
such  a  way  as  that  their  writings  became  the  satisfactory 
expression  of  the  hopes  and  longings  of  multitudes? 
These  are  open  questions  today  for  the  most  part;  but 
in  general,  it  may  be  said,  the  thought  of  scholars  is 
inclined  to  regard  the  “I”  in  the  majority  of  cases  as 
representing  the  personified  Jewish  community.  It  is  the 
nation  that  speaks  and  that  is  so  absorbing  a  theme  of 
interest  to  the  poets  and  people.  We  must,  therefore, 
accept  the  utterances  of  the  Psalms  as  for  the  most  part 
expressing  the  community’s  sentiments.  Even  where 
the  psalm  was  originally  the  expression  of  an  individual’s 
experience,  upon  being  taken  up  into  the  Temple  hymn- 
book  it  came  to  be  looked  upon  as  expressing  a  generally 
representative  state  of  mind.1 

133.  The  problem  of  suffering. — The  problem  pre¬ 
sented  to  the  Jewish  community  by  its  continued 
sufferings  takes  up  much  of  the  psalmists’  attention. 
The  note  of  discouragement  sounds  repeatedly: 

1  See  ibid.,  pp.  21-32. 


222 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


How  long,  O  Yahweh,  wilt  thou  forget  me  forever? 

How  long  wilt  thou  hide  thy  face  from  me  ? 

How  long  must  I  take  counsel  with  myself, 

Having  sorrow  in  my  heart  daily  ? 

How  long  shall  mine  enemy  be  exalted  over  me 
[Ps.  13:1,  2;  cf.  44:9-26;  94:3-7]? 

The  arrogant  attitude  of  the  wicked  is  deplored  and 
pictured  in  most  vivid  terms  (Pss.  10:3-11;  12:3,  4; 
38:1911. ;  73:3-12).  But  notwithstanding  all  this,  the 
pious  are  adjured  to  forego  all  worry  and  have  a  satisfying 
confidence  in  God  (Pss.  37;  92:7,8,12-15).  To  this  end, 
the  final  judgment  and  overthrow  of  the  nations  here  upon 
earth  is  glowingly  portrayed  (Pss.  96 : 10-13  J  98 18,9);  and 
the  rule  of  the  Messiah  over  all  nations  is  foretold  (Ps.  2). 

134.  Imprecatory  Psalms. — In  this  connection  are 
found  many  prayers  for  and  exultations  over  the  coming 
destruction  of  the  wicked.  These  are  commonly  known 
as  the  Imprecatory  Psalms.  The  most  bitter  of  them 
are  Pss.  59,  6-15;  69;  83;  109:6-20;  137:7-9;  and 
149 : 5-9.  What  is  to  be  said  as  to  such  vitriolic  utter¬ 
ances?  For  those  who  would  make  the  psalmists  to 
have  been  paragons  of  virtue,  saints  without  blemish, 
these  psalms  present  insuperable  difficulties.  But  the 
psalmists  were  after  all  human  beings  and  as  such 
subject  to  human  reactions.  Not  only  so,  but  they  were 
Jews;  and  as  such  they  had  that  intensity  of  spirit 
which  is  characteristic  of  the  Semitic  peoples.  When  we 
recall  the  long  history  of  oppression  and  wrong  through 
which  the  Hebrews  had  gone  at  the  hands  of  Assyrians, 
Babylonians,  and  Persians,  the  wonder  is  not  that  there 
is  some  sentiment  of  this  violent  sort  in  their  literature, 
but  that  there  is  not  more.  If  we  think  of  Israel  in  terms 
of  the  experiences  during  the  great  world-war  of  such 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


223 


countries  as  Belgium,  France,  Serbia,  and  Armenia,  we 
shall  not  find  it  hard  to  understand  and  to  forgive  the 
Jewish  state  of  mind.  To  understand  their  religious 
and  moral  problem  we  must  remember  that  they  esti¬ 
mated  the  value  of  religion  by  the  tangible  test  of 
material  prosperity.  But  they  had  been  ardently 
religious;  and  yet  they  had  experienced  and  were 
experiencing  only  adversity.  As  a  matter  of  fact 
judged  by  any  just  standard,  Israel  was  a  more  pious 
and  a  purer  people  than  any  of  their  oppressors.  They 
were  being  wrongfully  robbed  and  slaughtered  and  the 
robbers  and  murderers  were  prospering! 

Still  another  approach  to  the  interpretation  and 
evaluation  of  these  Imprecatory  Psalms  must  be  made. 
The  passionate  hatred  of  these  psalmists  for  those  who 
had  oppressed  Israel  is  but  the  obverse  of  their  passion 
for  justice.  The  measure  of  a  man’s  enthusiasm  for 
righteousness  is  often  indicated  by  the  intensity  of  his 
wrath  against  sin.  To  be  lukewarm  or  indifferent  in 
the  presence  of  wrong  is  no  mark  of  a  true  lover  of 
justice.  Still  further,  for  the  post-exilic  Jews  justice  and 
piety  had  to  be  vindicated  in  the  life  that  now  is,  for 
they  had  no  conception  of  rewards  and  punishments  in 
a  life  to  come.  If  the  justice  of  God  was  to  be  com¬ 
mended  to  men,  it  must  manifest  itself  plainly  here  on 
earth.  Death  held  nothing  in  store  for  the  righteous. 
Death,  indeed,  was  to  be  dreaded,  for  the  existence 
anticipated  in  Sheol  was  empty  and  worthless,  and  by 
no  means  to  be  coveted  (Pss.  6:5;  16:9-11;  30:3,  9; 
88:10-12;  115:17,  18).  One  of  the  most  highly  treas¬ 
ured  rewards  of  the  pious  was  continuance  of  life  on 
earth  to  a  hale  and  hearty  old  age  (Pss.  103:4,  5 ;  128:5, 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


224 

6;  143:7).  To  be  cut  off  prematurely  in  the  prime  of 
life  is  the  fitting  reward  of  the  wicked  (Pss.  9:17-19; 
55:15,  23;  86:13;  88:5).  If  the  wicked  do  enjoy  good 
fortune  for  a  season,  it  is  but  a  transient,  fleeting  experi¬ 
ence  to  be  brought  to  a  speedy  ending. 

135.  Life  after  death. — There  are  three  difficult 
passages  in  the  Psalms  that  are  open  to  debate  as  to 
whether  or  not  they  contain  any  gleam  of  hope  regarding 
the  life  to  come.  The  first  of  these  is  Ps.  17: 13-15.  This  is 
a  very  bad  piece  of  text  and  any  translation  must  be  tenta¬ 
tive.  The  following  involves  some  slight  changes  of  text: 

Arise,  0  Yahweh,  confront  him,  cast  him  down; 

Deliver  me  from  the  wicked. 

Slay  them  by  thy  sword; 

By  thy  hand,  O  Yahweh,  slay  them  out  of  the  world. 

May  this  be  their  portion  in  life. 

And  may  their  bodies  be  filled  with  thy  stored-up  [penalty]. 

And  may  their  sons  be  sated  therewith. 

And  may  they  hand  on  the  residue  to  their  babes. 

But  I — I  shall  see  thy  face  in  vindication; 

I  shall  be  satisfied  when  thy  form  awakes. 

According  to  this  rendering,  the  poet  anticipates  seeing 
in  this  life  the  execution  of  Yahweh’s  judgment  upon 
the  wicked  and  the  corresponding  vindication  of  his 
own  righteousness  and  that  of  Yahweh  himself.  This 
translation  of  the  last  two  lines  is  the  most  natural 
grammatically  and  fits  in  well  with  Hebrew  modes  of 
thought.  Yahweh  is  quite  humanly  represented  very 
often;  and  it  is  not  repugnant  to  the  Hebrew  mind  that 
he  should  take  a  nap.1 

1  The  more  common  rendering  is  “I  shall  be  satisfied  when  I  awake 
with  thy  form.”  But  this  is  harsher  Hebrew  and  leaves  the  “awaking” 
very  vaguely  identified.  Is  it  after  death,  or,  figuratively,  after  a  period 
of  stupor  ? 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


225 


The  second  ambiguous  passage  is  Ps.  49:6-21.  This 
is  a  statement  of  the  fact  that  the  wealth  of  the 
wicked  will  not  avail  to  release  him  from  the  death  that 
surely  awaits  him.  All  men  die;  there  is  no  release 
from  that  war.  But  the  implication  clearly  is  that  the 
wicked  die  before  their  time.  The  pious,  however,  are 
under  the  care  of  God,  who  does  not  permit  death  to 
snatch  his  saints  away  prematurely. 

Surely  God  will  rescue  me, 

From  the  power  of  Sheol  he  will  indeed  take  me  [Ps.  49:15]. 

This  is  an  expression  of  the  assurance  that  though 
Sheol  reach  forth  greedy  claws  for  its  prey,  God  will 
rescue  the  pious  from  its  clutch.  There  is  no  thought 
of  life  after  death  here  any  more  than  in  verse  15  where 
the  pious  is  pictured  as  having  the  rule  over  the  wicked 
in  the  morning.  This  is  not  the  morning  of  resurrection 
but  the  dawn  of  a  new  era  in  which  the  righteous  shall 
attain  their  proper  pre-eminence.  A  similar  usage  of 
the  phrase  is  seen  in  Ps.  143:8,  where  the  poet  be¬ 
seeches  God  to  manifest  himself  in  his  behalf : 

Do  not  hide  thy  face  from  me, 

That  I  should  be  like  those  descending  into  the  pit. 

Cause  me  to  hear  thy  loving-kindness  in  the  morning; 

For  I  have  trusted  in  thee. 

Teach  me  the  way  that  I  should  go; 

For  unto  thee  have  I  lifted  up  my  soul  [Ps.  143:7,  8]. 

It  is  quite  clear  that  “in  the  morning”  here  refers  to 
a  time  to  come  in  the  life  of  the  speaker  upon  earth. 

The  third  passage  in  which  the  thought  of  life  after 
death  has  been  found  is  Ps.  73:23-28.  In  the  pre¬ 
ceding  verses  the  Psalmist  has  expressed  the  thought 
that  the  wicked  are  suddenly  swept  away  by  the  hand 


226 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


of  God.  Then  after  regretting  his  temporary  forgetful¬ 
ness  of  this  fact,  the  poet  goes  on  to  say: 

But  I  am  continually  with  thee. 

Thou  dost  hold  my  right  hand. 

By  thy  counsel  thou  wilt  guide  me, 

And  after  thee  thou  wilt  take  me  by  the  hand.1 
Whom  have  I  in  the  heavens  ? 

And  besides  thee  I  have  no  delight  in  the  earth. 

My  flesh  and  my  heart  fail; 

But  God  is  the  rock  of  my  heart  and  my  portion  forever. 

For  lo,  those  that  are  far  from  thee  will  perish; 

Thou  wilt  surely  destroy  all  who  become  apostates  from  thee. 
But  as  for  me — the  nearness  of  God  is  my  good; 

I  have  made  the  Lord  Yahweh  my  refuge, 

To  tell  of  all  thy  works. 

The  thought  of  this  passage  concerns  itself  with  the 
consciousness  of  the  immediate  and  unfailing  presence  of 

God  here  in  the  life  upon  earth.  The  pious  rejoice  in 

0 

and  are  sustained  by  this,  while  the  wicked  are  cut  off 
from  life. 

It  is  on  the  whole  improbable  that  there  is  any 
thought  of  a  worthful  life  after  death  in  the  Psalter. 
The  function  of  a  hymnbook,  as  we  have  already  sug¬ 
gested,  is  to  express  the  aspiration  and  worship  of  the 
common  man.  It  does  not  come  into  being  as  an  agency 
for  the  propagation  of  new  ideas  or  ideals.  But  the 
thought  of  rewards  and  punishments  in  a  future  life 
was  certainly  an  unfamiliar  idea  in  the  exilic  and  post- 
exilic  age.  Even  if  all  the  possible  references  to  future 
life  in  the  Psalms  and  in  the  other  exilic  and  post-exilic 

1  This  line  is  very  difficult.  The  Hebrew  text  as  it  stands  says, 
“And  after  glory  thou  wilt  take  me”;  or  perhaps,  “And  afterward 
gloriously  thou  wilt  take  me.”  The  rendering  given  above  rests  upon 
a  slight  change  of  text. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


227 


writings  really  did  express  this  hope,  yet  the  total 
amount  of  material  on  the  subject  would  be  very  small, 
showing  that  this  thought  did  not  play  a  large  part  in 
the  life  of  early  Judaism.  The  absence  of  this  hope 
made  the  ethical  problem  very  acute  for  a  people  who 
estimated  the  value  of  religion  in  terms  of  the  tangible 
good  derived  therefrom.  The  surprising  thing  is  that, 
lacking  any  hope  of  this  sort  and  compelled  to  find  the 
satisfactions  of  religion  in  the  life  that  now  is,  the  Jews 
clung  steadfastly  to  their  religious  faith  and  were  ready 
when  occasion  arose  to  die  for  their  ideals.  The  ethical 
problem  was  especially  acute  from  the  point  of  view  of 
the  individual  man.  The  nation  perpetuates  itself 
continually;  and  the  rewards  that  fail  in  one  generation 
may  be  anticipated  for  a  later  one,  but  the  individual 
dies  and  “where  is  he  ?”  We  turn  now  to  this  individual 
to  see  what  his  standards  were  and  what  were  his  consola¬ 
tions  and  hopes. 

136.  The  worth  of  man. — The  individual,  though  crea¬ 
ted  by  God,  is  as  nothing  and  less  than  nothing  in 
God’s  sight: 

Let  me  know  how  frail  I  am  [39:4]. 

And  not  only  I,  but 

Surely  every  man  at  his  best  estate  is  altogether  vanity 

[39:5]- 

So  also  in  9:20;  39:11.  This  is  the  natural  conclusion 
when  man  is  altogether  “of  the  earth”  (10:18);  how 
can  such  an  one  be  of  account  in  the  sight  of  heaven  ? 
The  vanity  and  brevity  of  human  life  are  so  self-evident 
that  one  of  the  psalmists  expresses  his  wonder  that  God 
should  give  man  any  consideration  at  all : 


228 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Yahweh,  what  is  man  that  thou  takest  knowledge  of  him, 

Or  the  son  of  man  that  thou  takest  account  of  him  ? 

Man  is  like  unto  a  breath ; 

His  days  are  as  a  shadow  that  passes  away  [144:3  f.j. 

These  somber  and  depressing  strains  are  not  left, 
however,  to  ring  in  our  memories  alone.  At  least  one 
of  the  Psalms  challenges  this  conception  of  humanity 
with  confidence.  Perhaps  there  is  deliberate  expres¬ 
sion  of  contrary  opinion  in  these  two  psalms.  In  any 
case  the  phraseology  of  the  two  passages  is  in  part 
identical: 

What  is  man  that  thou  art  mindful  of  him, 

And  the  son  of  man  that  thou  visitest  him  ? 

For  thou  has  made  him  but  little  lower  than  God, 

And  hast  crowned  him  with  glory  and  honor. 

Thou  hast  made  him  to  have  dominion  over  the  works  of 
thy  hands; 

Thou  hast  put  all  things  under  his  feet. 

All  sheep  and  oxen; 

Yea,  and  the  beasts  of  the  field, 

The  fowl  of  the  air,  and  the  fish  of  the  sea; 

Whatsoever  passes  through  the  paths  of  the  seas  [8:4-8]. 

The  low  estimate  of  man  is  made  in  view  of  the  un¬ 
approachable  majesty  and  excellence  of  God;  the  high 
valuation,  on  the  other  hand,  is  based  on  a  compari¬ 
son  with  subhuman  life.  The  average  view  of  the 
Psalms  regarding  human  nature  and  its  capacity  is 
midway  between  these  extremes.  The  balance  inclines, 
indeed,  toward  the  higher  level  rather  than  the  lower, 
for  the  longing  and  aspirations  of  man  savor  rather 
of  the  divine  than  of  the  brute. 

137.  The  ways  of  the  wicked. — The  ideal  character 
of  the  psalmists  is  constantly  brought  into  contrast  with 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


229 


its  opposite  type,  viz.,  the  wicked.  The  virtues  of  the 
pious  shine  by  contrast  with  the  vices  and  crimes  of  the 
sinner.  Who  are  sinners  ?  If  we  may  accept  the  answer 
of  Ps.  130:3,  all  men  are  in  that  class: 

If  Thou  shouldest  keep  watch  of  iniquities,  O  Yahweh, 

Who  could  stand  ? 

A  similar  opinion  of  humanity  crops  out  in  Ps.  14:1-3: 

They  have  dealt  corruptly,  they  have  done  abominably; 
There  is  none  that  doeth  good. 

Yahweh  looked  forth  from  heaven  upon  the  sons  of  men 
To  see  if  there  were  any  man  of  understanding  that  did 
seek  after  God; 

They  are  all  corrupt,  they  are  together  become  impure; 

There  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no,  not  one. 

Another  psalmist,  in  a  period  of  depression,  utters  a 
more  specific  charge  against  the  human  race: 

I  said  in  my  perturbation,  “All  men  are  liars”  [116:11]. 

But  such  sentiments  are  by  no  means  the  general  judg¬ 
ment  of  the  Psalms.  There  is  rather  a  very  sharp 
discrimination  between  the  good  and  the  bad.  Deceit 
and  lying  are  especially  characteristic  of  the  wicked,  and 
are  an  abomination  to  Yahweh.1  False  swearing,  of 
course,  falls  under  the  ban.2  Hypocrites  are  subject  to 
the  wrath  of  God,  for  they  find  no  response  in  His  heart 
to  their  pretenses.3 

Ungodly  people  are  unstable  morally.  They  cannot 
be  depended  upon  to  fulfil  their  contracts.  They  say 
and  do  not  do.  They  speak  smoothly  with  their  lips 
while  malice  is  in  their  hearts: 

1 5 :6;  7^4;  12:2;  43:1;  101:7.  3  24:4.  3  28:3;  50:16-20. 


230 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


There  is  no  sincerity  in  their  mouth; 

Their  inward  part  is  a  yawning  gulf, 

Their  throat  is  an  open  sepulchre; 

They  make  smooth  their  tongue  [5 : 9].1 

They  are  characterized  likewise  by  a  spirit  and  attitude 
of  hauteur  and  arrogance.  They  are  bursting  with 
pride  and  hold  the  pious  in  contempt,  not  hesitating 
even  at  slander  and  eagerly  spreading  evil  reports  about 
their  neighbors.2  They  are  so  increased  and  so  spread 
themselves  as  that  they  seem  to  occupy  every  place 
and  leave  no  room  for  the  righteous.3 

138.  The  iniquity  of  the  wicked  is  represented  not  as  a 
static  quantity,  but  rather  as  a  dynamic  principle.  It  is 
ever  seeking  to  find  expression  in  acts  of  ill  will  toward 
the  pious.  The  wicked  inflict  injury  without  provocation 
and  basely  return  evil  for  good.4  They  lay  traps  to 
ensnare  the  pious  and  they  bribe  authorities  to  pervert 
just  decisions.5  Their  wickedness  is  a  disturbing  force 
within  them,  causing  them  to  travail  with  evil  plans 
like  a  woman  with  child.6  Fortunately  their  wickedness 
often  recoils  upon  themselves.  They  hate  the  good  and 
stop  at  nothing  to  accomplish  their  evil  purposes  against 
them.  Their  record  teems  with  deeds  of  oppression  and 
bloodshed.  They  watch  the  pious  and  plan  their  de¬ 
struction.  They  are  bloodthirsty  lovers  of  violence.7 

139.  The  identity  of  the  wicked. — The  intensity  of  the 
feeling  and  the  violence  of  the  language  in  these  denuncia¬ 
tions  of  the  wicked  stir  our  curiosity.  Who  are  these 

1  So  also  26:4;  28:3.  4  See  7:4;  35: 12;  38: 20. 

2  See  1:1;  5:5;  15:3;  40:4;  101:5.  5  Pss.  15:5;  26:9k;  31:4- 

3  See  12:1,  8;  13:2.  6  Ps.  7:14. 

7  Pss.  5:6;  11:5;  17:9k;  18:40;  26:9;  37:12-14. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


231 


“ wicked”?  Are  they  fellow-Jews  or  pagans?  Is  the 
language  to  be  taken  literally  ?  Are  the  foes  of  the  pious 
really  murderers  ?  Do  they  live  in  the  constant  endeavor 
to  do  injury  to  their  neighbors?  No  normal  society 
ever  existed  for  any  length  of  time  with  any  considerable 
proportion  of  its  members  murderously  inclined  toward 
the  rest.  If  these  charges  of  the  psalmists  are  to  be 
given  any  credence,  we  must  recognize  that  the  com¬ 
munity  of  the  pious  was  in  real  danger.  They  must 
have  lived  in  perpetual  and  fearful  trepidation,  no  man 
trusting  his  neighbor.  There  are  two  alternatives  to 
this  situation.  On  the  one  hand,  such  language  is 
explicable  on  the  basis  of  odium  theologicum.  That  is 
to  say,  it  may  reflect  a  split  in  the  Jewish  community 
itself,  one  section  remaining  loyal  to  the  customs  and 
beliefs  of  the  fathers,  the  other  having  abandoned  the 
viewpoint  of  the  past  and  committed  itself  to  some 
new  world-view  or  philosophy.  The  presuppositions  for 
such  an  interpretation  of  the  language  are  at  hand  in 
abundance  from  the  later  period  to  which  most  of  the 
Psalms  belong.  Alexander’s  conquest  of  the  Orient 
meant  not  only  the  triumph  of  Greek  arms,  but  also 
the  superimposing  of  Greek  civilization  upon  the  Oriental 
'  world.  The  Hellenization  of  the  Orient  was  from  that 
time  on  a  progressive  process.  Alexandria  in  the  heart 
of  Egypt  became  a  center  of  Greek  influence.  Other 
Greek  cities  sprang  up  all  over  the  Oriental  world  and 
became  foci  for  the  propagation  of  Greek  civilization. 
Hellenization  of  the  Orient  was  on  the  march  and,  had 
it  not  been  for  the  folly  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who 
was  not  content  to  let  well  enough  alone,  the  Jewish 
people  themselves  might  have  yielded  as  not  unwilling 


232 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


victims  of  its  alluring  charms.  But  Antiochus  sought  to 
hasten  the  process  and  to  convert  the  Jews  to  the 
Hellenic  program  by  force.  This  attempt  roused  the 
latent  loyalty  of  the  Jewish  people  and  fanned  the  flame 
of  a  religious  revolt  which  succeeded  in  saving  Judaism 
from  impending  destruction.  During  this  long-drawn- 
out  struggle  between  the  Hebraic  and  the  Hellenic 
world-views,  the  feelings  of  the  opposing  parties  became 
very  intense.  Such  language  and  attitudes  as  are 
reflected  in  the  Psalms,  particularly  in  the  description  of 
and  imprecations  upon  the  wicked,  might  conceivably 
spring  out  of  this  situation.  In  that  case  the  pious  of 
the  Psalter  would  be  the  faithful  Jews  who  remained 
steadfastly  loyal  to  the  way  of  the  fathers,  and  the 
wicked  would  of  course  be  renegade  Jews  who  identified 
themselves  with  the  newer  philosophy  and  civilization  of 
Greece.1  Family  quarrels  are  apt  to  give  rise  to  intense 
feeling  and  harsh  language.  When  to  this  element  is 
added  the  bitterness  of  religious  strife,  the  language  and 
tone  of  the  Imprecatory  Psalms  become  readily  intel¬ 
ligible. 

The  second  alternative  to  the  view  just  stated  is 
that  the  “ wicked”  of  the  Psalter  were  non-Jews  or 
pagans.  In  that  case,  the  enemies  of  the  pious  Jew 
would  be  represented  by  the  Greek  government,  which 
held  the  Jews  in  subjection  from  the  days  of  Alexander 
and  his  immediate  successors  down  through  the  Seleucid 
era  to  the  Maccabaean  revolt  in  the  second  century  b.c. 
From  this  point  of  view  the  two  emotions  combining  to 
produce  this  ferocity  of  spirit  and  of  language  would  be 

1  This  interpretation  is  forcefully  presented  and  defended  by  Fried- 
lander,  Griechische  Philosophic  im  Allen  Testament  (1904). 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


233 


loyalty  to  the  Jewish  religion,  as  it  was  undergoing  more  or 
less  active  persecution,  and  hatred  of  the  alien  oppressor. 

140.  The  atheism  of  the  wicked. — In  any  case,  which¬ 
ever  of  these  diagnoses  be  correct,  or  if  neither  is  satis¬ 
factory,  the  wicked  are  people  who  do  not  give  God  His 
due.  They  deny  God: 

The  fool  has  said  in  his  heart,  “There  is  no  God” 

[14:1;  53:1]. 

The  “fool”  in  question  is  not  so  much  a  man  lacking 
in  intellectual  keenness;  he  is  rather  one  who  fails  to 
appreciate  the  moral  and  spiritual  interests  in  life.  Nor 
is  it  the  thought  of  the  psalmists  that  these  deniers  of 
God  are  theoretical  atheists.  They  are  rather  thinking 
of  them  as  men  whose  practical  conduct  implies  that 
“there  is  no  fear  of  God  before  their  eyes”  (36:1).  This 
is  clear  from  a  comparison  of  10:4  with  10:3,  n,  13. 
In  10:3: 

The  wicked  boasts  of  his  heart’s  desire, 

And  the  covetous  vaunteth  himself,  though  he  contemn 
Yahweh. 

If  Yahweh  is  contemned,  He  nevertheless  exists;  con¬ 
tempt  is  not  poured  out  upon  a  non-existent  person. 
Similarly  in  10:13: 

He  [the  wicked]  has  said  in  his  heart,  “  God  has  forgotten; 

“He  [God]  hides  His  face,  He  will  never  see.” 

Here  again  the  wicked  takes  the  existence  of  God  for 
granted;  but  he  does  not  reckon  with  Him  as  a  potent 
influence  upon  the  affairs  of  men.  Consequently  the 
same  conception  is  inherent  in  10:4: 

The  wicked  in  the  pride  of  his  countenance  says,  “He 
[God]  will  not  require”; 

All  his  thoughts  are:  “There  is  no  God.” 


234 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


It  is  a  practical  atheism  that  is  here  described.  There 
are  men  who  dismiss  the  thought  of  God  from  all  their 
purposes  and  plans.  “They  call  not  upon  God”  (53:4). 
He  is  for  them  a  negligible  quantity.  And  yet,  in  all 
probability  they  would  indignantly  resent  the  charge  of 
atheism.  Indeed,  some  of  them  are  too  ready  to  accept 
the  theory  of  the  divine  government  of  the  universe, 
for  they  are  not  satisfied  with  the  worship  of  Yahweh 
alone,  but  supplement  it  by  the  practice  of  pagan  cults 
in  honor  of  other  gods  (16:4).  Such  apostates  from  the 
true  religion  are  in  the  writer’s  mind  in  40:4: 

Happy  is  the  man  that  has  made  Yahweh  his  trust, 

And  has  not  turned  away  to  the  arrogant  nor  to  such  as 
fall  away  treacherously. 

The  psalmists’  estimate  of  these  pagan  gods  is  clearly 
reflected  in  31 : 6: 

I  hate  them  that  regard  lying  vanities; 

But  I  trust  in  Yahweh. 

If  these  idolators  are  fellow-Jews,  as  is  probably  true, 
at  least  in  some  cases,  it  is  significant  of  the  length  and 
intensity  of  the  struggle  for  a  monotheistic  worship  in 
Israel.  Indeed,  we  know  that  as  late  as  the  fifth  century 
b.c.  the  Jewish  military  colony  at  Assuan  in  Egypt, 
enthusiastic  Yahweh- worshipers  though  they  were,  yet 
frankly  recognized  other  gods  than  Yahweh  and  wor¬ 
shiped  them  alongside  of,  and  in  association  with,  him. 
The  monotheistic  view  was  never  uncontested  in  Israel; 
it  was  always  in  need  of  ardent  and  intelligent  defense. 
And  such  defense  was  not  lacking  at  the  hands  of  prophets 
and  psalmists. 

14 1.  The  character  of  the  pious. — Turning  from  this 
dark  picture  of  the  wicked  man,  we  find  the  pious 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


235 


presented  to  us  in  shining  contrast.  Yet  it  is  no  ideal 
man  that  the  Psalms  portray,  but  a  man  torn  by  hopes 
and  fears  and  rent  by  passions  such  as  are  common  to 
man.  In  contrast  with  the  arrogance  and  pride  of  the 
ungodly,  the  pious  thinks  of  himself  and  his  people  as 
poor  and  weak.1  He  walks  in  the  fear  of  God.2  He 
craves  the  mercy  of  God  and  dreads  the  outpouring 
of  His  wrath.3  He  is  overwhelmed  at  times  with  dis¬ 
couragement  and  doubt.4  He  is  in  continual  sorrow 
and  at  times  gives  way  to  tears  and  groans.5  He  even 
indulges  himself  in  envy  as  he  beholds  the  prosperity 
of  the  wicked.6  He  is  depressed  as  he  sees  the  success 
of  iniquity  and  he  concludes  that  “the  faithful  fail 
from  among  the  sons  of  men”  (12:1).  He  recognizes 
that  the  pious  are  in  constant  need  of  divine  guidance 
and  that  it  is  given  to  them  when  they  comply  with  the 
requirements  of  God;7  the  meek  and  God-fearing  man 
indeed  is  admitted  into  the  very  secret  intimacy  of  God. 
But  man  is  by  nature  sinful  and  needs  the  forgiveness 
of  God.8  His  conception  of  divine  cleansing  and  pardon 
anticipates  the  Christian  teaching  of  the  necessity  of 
regeneration.  All  this  is  incomparably  expressed  in 
Psalm  51,  the  classic  utterance  of  the  sense  of  sin  and 
the  longing  for  pardon : 

Be  gracious  unto  me,  O  God,  in  accordance  with  Thy 
loving-kindness; 

In  accordance  with  the  multitude  of  Thy  mercies  wipe 
out  my  transgressions. 

Wash  me  thoroughly  from  my  guilt, 

1  E.g.,  9: 12,  18;  10: 12,  17.  s  E.g.,  13:  2;  6:6,  7. 

2  E.g.,  5:7;  33:18;  34:9;  cf.  25:9,  14.  6  E.g.,  73:3  ff. 

3  E.g.,  4: 1;  6: 2.  7  E.g.,  25:4,  9,  12,  14. 

4  E.g.,  22:6;  74:1  ff.;  77:7  ff.  8  E.g.,  25:7,  1 1 ;  66:18. 


236  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


And  cleanse  me  from  my  sin. 

For  my  transgressions  I  know, 

And  my  sin  is  ever  before  me. 

Against  Thee,  Thee  only,  have  I  sinned, 

And  what  is  evil  in  Thine  eyes  I  have  done; 

That  Thou  mayest  be  right  when  Thou  speakest, 

And  pure  when  Thou  judgest. 

Verily  I  was  brought  forth  in  iniquity. 

And  in  sin  did  my  mother  conceive  me. 

Verily  Thou  desirest  faithfulness  in  the  hidden  parts; 

In  the  secret  parts,  then,  teach  me  wisdom. 

Purge  me  with  hyssop  that  I  may  be  clean, 

Wash  me  that  I  may  be  whiter  than  snow. 

Do  Thou  let  me  hear  joy  and  gladness; 

Let  the  bones  which  Thou  has  broken  rejoice. 

Hide  Thy  face  from  my  sins, 

And  wipe  out  all  my  iniquities. 

Create  for  me  a  clean  heart,  O  God, 

And  renew  a  steadfast  spirit  within  me. 

Cast  me  not  away  from  Thy  presence, 

And  take  not  Thy  holy  spirit  from  me. 

Restore  to  me  the  joy  of  Thy  salvation, 

And  let  a  willing  spirit  sustain  me.  v 

I  would  teach  transgressors  Thy  ways, 

And  sinners  would  return  unto  Thee. 

Deliver  me  from  bloodshed,  O  God,  God  of  my  salvation, 
That  my  tongue  may  sing  aloud  Thy  righteousness. 

O  Lord,  open  Thou  my  lips, 

That  my  mouth  may  declare  Thy  praise. 

For  Thou  desirest  not  sacrifice; 

And  would  I  give  burnt-offering,  Thou  hast  no  pleasure. 
The  sacrifices  of  God  are  a  broken  spirit; 

A  broken  and  contrite  heart,  O  God,  Thou  wilt  not  despise. 


We  may  not  suppose  that  the  pious  were  continually 
in  the  frame  of  mind  represented  by  Psalm  51,  nor  indeed 
that  all  of  them  were  ever  in  that  attitude.  This  is 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


23  7 


rather  a  mood  that  characterizes  the  most  spiritually 
minded  only,  and  that  too  only  occasionally.  Such 
sentiments  crystallizing  into  a  permanent  attitude  of 
life  would  be  fatal  to  healthy,  normal  activities.  That 
the  state  of  mind  of  such  passages  as  Psalm  51  was  only 
sporadic  and  temporary,  is  shown  by  statements  of 
quite  a  contrary  sort  in  other  psalms.  One  psalmist 
confidently  declares  that  he  has  kept  the  ways  of  Yahweh 
and  cites  his  good  fortune  in  support  of  his  claim : 

For  I  have  kept  the  ways  of  Yahweh, 

And  have  not  wickedly  departed  from  my  God. 

For  all  His  ordinances  were  before  me, 

And  I  put  not  away  His  statutes  from  me. 

And  I  was  perfect  with  him, 

And  I  kept  myself  from  mine  iniquity. 

Therefore  has  Yahweh  recompensed  me  according  to  my 
righteousness, 

According  to  the  cleanness  of  my  hands  before  His  eyes 
[18:21-24;  cf.  26:1-6,  1 1]. 

Another  covets  the  scrutinizing  eye  of  Yahweh  to  ferret 
out  any  hidden  defects  in  his  character: 

Search  me,  O  God,  and  know  my  heart, 

Try  me  and  know  my  thoughts; 

And  see  if  there  be  any  harmful  way  in  me; 

And  lead  me  in  the  way  everlasting  [139:23  f.]. 

Still  another  in  contrast  with  this  last  shrinks  from 
the  eye  of  Yahweh,  knowing  himself  after  all  to  be 
nought  but  man : 

Enter  not  into  judgment  with  Thy  servant, 

For  in  Thy  sight  shall  no  man  living  be  justified  [143 : 2]. 

From  this  point  of  view  the  constant  help  of  God  is 
necessary  that  the  speech  and  thought  of  the  pious  may 
be  kept  pleasing  unto  Yahweh: 


238  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Who  can  discern  errors  ? 

Clear  Thou  me  from  hidden  faults. 

Restrain  Thy  servant  also  from  arrogant  men, 

Let  them  not  rule  over  me. 

Then  shall  I  be  perfect, 

And  I  shall  be  innocent  of  great  transgression. 

Let  the  words  of  my  mouth  and  the  meditations  of  my 
heart 

Be  acceptable  in  Thy  sight,  O  Yahweh,  my  rock  and  my 
redeemer  [19:12-14]. 

The  pious  is  the  favorite  of  God,  enjoys  His  protec¬ 
tion,  delights  in  His  law,  is  grateful  for  His  bounty,  and 
lives  to  praise  Him.1  He  delights  in  the  temple  and  its 
services;  he  loves  companionship  with  his  fellow-saints; 
and  identifies  the  interests  of  the  pious  with  the  interests 
of  God.2  He  prides  himself  upon  his  uprightness  of 
heart  and  his  righteousness.3 

His  further  virtues  include  generosity  to  the  poor, 
of  whose  necessity  he  does  not  take  advantage  by 
exacting  interest;  on  the  contrary  he  deals  graciously 
with  them  and  lends  freely.4  He  was  even  capable  of 
brotherly  kindness  to  those  who  rewarded  him  by  hos¬ 
tility.5  He  claims  the  merit  of  meekness,6  though  his 
bitter  hatred  of  his  foes  seems  to  spring  from  a  contrary 
state  of  mind.7  He  rejoices  whole-heartedly  when  he 
sees  dire  disaster  befall  his  enemies.8  He  is  conscious 
of  his  own  incorruptible  integrity  and,  though  appreci- 

1  E.g.,  1:2;  13:6;  18:20;  40:8;  4:3,7,85  9:14;  24:66:.;  74:12. 

2  E.g.,  16:3;  26:4,  5;  69:9;  35:1. 

3  E.g.,  24:3-6;  25:21;  73:1;  7:9;  11:7;  18:20;  43:1,  2. 

4  E.g.,  41: 1-3;  37:25  k;  112:5.  5  E.g., 35: 13, 14.  6  E.g.,  25:9. 

7  E.g.,  7 : 6  ff.;  18:40;  21;  28:3ft.;  35*4  40:13-15;  4i:7®- 

8  E.g.,  35:9;  54:7;  55:i6ff. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


239 


ative  of  wealth,  knows  that  it  cannot  preserve  anyone 
from  death.1  Long  life,  on  the  contrary,  is  assured  to 
those  whose  speech  is  pure,  who  love  peace,  and  who  live 
the  good  life.2  An  attractive  sketch  of  the  pious  char¬ 
acter  is  presented  in  Psalm  15: 

O  Yahweh,  who  can  sojourn  in  Thy  tent  ? 

Who  can  dwell  in  Thy  holy  hill  ? 

He  who  walks  in  integrity  and  works  righteousness, 

And  speaks  truth  in  his  heart. 

There  is  no  slander  upon  his  tongue; 

Neither  has  he  done  wrong  to  his  friend; 

Nor  taken  up  a  reproach  against  his  neighbor. 

A  reprobate  is  despised  in  his  eyes; 

But  he  honours  those  that  fear  Yahweh. 

He  swears  to  his  own  hurt  and  does  not  retract. 

He  does  not  give  out  his  money  upon  interest; 

Nor  has  he  taken  a  bribe  against  the  innocent. 

Whoso  does  such  things  will  never  be  moved. 

142.  Such  men  have  inner  resources  that  fortify  them 
against  the  shocks  of  life.  Even  when  fortune  deserts 
them,  faith  does  not  fail  them : 

Tremble  and  sin  not. 

Commune  with  your  own  heart  upon  your  bed,  and  be  still. 

Offer  the  sacrifices  of  righteousness, 

And  put  your  trust  in  Yahweh  [4:4,  5]. 

In  this  trust,  the  pious  looks  forward  without  fear. 
Yahweh  will  be  mindful  of  His  own.3  Indeed  the  loyal 
servant  of  Yahweh  bears  a  charmed  life.  He  walks 
amid  the  ills  of  life  unharmed: 

The  righteous  shall  flourish  like  the  palm  tree; 

He  shall  grow  like  a  cedar  in  Lebanon. 

1  E.g.,  41:12;  ioi:6ff.;  112:3;  49:6ff. 

2  E.g.,  34: 12-14;  37:27;  92: 13  ff.  3  ps.  73. 


240 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Planted  in  the  house  of  Yahweh, 

They  shall  flourish  in  the  courts  of  our  God. 

They  shall  bring  forth  fruit  in  old  age ; 

They  shall  be  full  of  sap  and  richness; 

To  declare  that  Yahweh  is  upright, 

My  Rock,  in  whom  is  no  unrighteousness  [92:12-15]. 

Still  more  vividly  is  this  confidence  in  God’s  care 
His  people  expressed  in  Psalm  91 : 

He  that  dwelleth  in  the  intimacy  of  the  Most  High, 

That  sojoumeth  under  the  shadow  of  the  Almighty, 

Says  of  Yahweh,  “He  is  my  refuge  and  my  fortress, 

My  God  in  whom  I  trust.” 

Surely  He  will  deliver  thee  from  the  snare  of  the  fowler, 
And  from  the  noisome  pestilence. 

He  will  cover  thee  with  His  pinions, 

And  under  His  wings  shalt  thou  take  refuge. 

His  truth  shall  be  a  shield  and  buckler. 

Thou  shalt  not  be  afraid  of  the  terror  by  night, 

Nor  of  the  arrow  that  flies  by  day, 

Nor  of  the  pestilence  that  walks  in  darkness, 

Nor  of  the  destruction  that  devastates  at  noon-day. 

A  thousand  will  fall  at  thy  side, 

And  ten  thousand  at  thy  right  hand; 

But  it  shall  not  come  nigh  thee. 

Thou  shalt  merely  behold  with  thine  eyes, 

And  see  the  reward  of  the  wicked. 

For  Yahweh  is  thy  refuge; 

Thou  hast  made  the  Most  High  thy  habitation. 
Calamity  shall  not  be  sent  upon  thee; 

Nor  shall  plague  come  nigh  thy  tent. 

For  He  will  give  his  angels  charge  concerning  thee, 

To  keep  thee  in  all  thy  ways. 

They  will  carry  thee  on  their  hands, 

Lest  thou  dash  thy  foot  against  a  stone. 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


241 


Thou  shalt  tread  upon  lion  and  adder; 

The  young  lion  and  the  serpent  thou  shalt  trample  under 
foot. 

Because  he  has  set  his  love  upon  Me,  I  will  deliver  him; 

I  will  set  him  on  high  because  he  has  known  My  name. 

He  will  call  upon  Me  and  I  will  answer  him; 

I  will  be  with  him  in  trouble; 

I  will  rescue  him  and  honor  him; 

With  long  life  will  I  satisfy  him, 

And  I  will  show  him  My  salvation. 

143.  Such  an  idyllic  life  can  hardly  have  ever  been 
realized;  it  is  a  dream,  a  vision  of  faith,  rather  than  an 
experience.  Yet  the  writer  of  Psalm  103  bursts  into  a 
paean  of  praise  in  recognition  of  just  such  favors  from 
God: 

Bless  Yahweh,  O  my  soul, 

And  all  that  is  within  me  bless  His  holy  name. 

Bless  Yahweh,  O  my  soul, 

And  forget  not  all  His  benefits, 

Who  pardons  all  thine  iniquity; 

Who  heals  all  thy  diseases; 

Who  redeems  thy  life  from  the  pit; 

Who  crowns  thee  with  loving  kindness  and  mercies; 

Who  satisfies  thy  desires  with  good  things, 

So  that  thy  youth  is  renewed  like  the  eagle. 

144.  The  ethical  motives  of  the  Psalms  are  very  clearly 
expressed.  The  underlying  urge  to  goodness  is  the 
familiar  conviction  that  piety  pays  and  wickedness  is 
punished.  This  idea  is  the  opening  note  of  the  Psalter 
(Ps.  1)  and  it  is  sounded  over  and  over  again.1  But  there 
are  flashes  here  and  there  of  a  less  commercial  point  of 
view.  The  Golden  Age  is  pictured  in  ethical  terms  in 

1  Pss.  5:12;  6:10;  9:6;  11:5-7;  34:10,  II,  19,  20;  84:12;  91; 
92:12-15;  103:1-18;  112:1-9;  127;  128:1-4;  144:12-15. 


242 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Ps.  85:9-13.  Righteousness  is  declared  to  be  better 
than  riches  in  Ps.  119:72,  127;  and  the  gift  of  Yahweh 
may  be  something  better  than  abundance  of  corn  and 
wine  (Ps.  4:7).  But  we  must  go  to  a  psalm  that  did 
not  find  admission  into  the  Psalter  to  hear  the  highest 
note  of  the  poets  of  Judaism.1  In  the  third  chapter  of 
Habakkuk  is  found  what  is  unmistakably  a  psalm. 
This  is  an  eschatological  poem,  portraying  the  manifesta¬ 
tion  of  divine  power  which  the  Psalmist  hopes  for  and 
expects  to  see.  But  at  verse  17  the  point  of  view 
changes.  The  writer  checks  himself,  apparently,  and 
asks  himself  some  such  question  as  this:  “Suppose  that 
my  hopes  are  not  realized — what  then?”  To  such  a 
question  he  makes  reply: 

Though  the  fig-tree  do  not  blossom, 

And  there  be  no  fruit  on  the  vines; 

Though  the  product  of  the  olive  fail, 

And  the  fields  yield  no  food; 

Though  the  flock  be  cut  off  from  the  fold, 

And  there  be  no  ox  in  the  stalls; 

Yet  I  will  exult  in  Yahweh, 

I  will  rejoice  in  the  God  of  my  salvation. 

Yahweh,  the  Lord,  is  my  strength; 

And  he  has  made  my  feet  like  hinds’  feet ; 

And  he  will  make  me  to  walk  upon  the  heights 

[Hab.  3:17-19]. 

This  says  that  though  all  material  rewards  fail,  the 
poet  will  nevertheless  find  his  highest  satisfaction  in 
Yahweh.  He  takes  his  refuge  in  mysticism  when 
practical  realities  fail.  This  is  convincing  proof  that 
there  was  a  growing  conviction  in  Judaism  that  the 
needs  of  the  soul  were  not  to  be  met  by  mere  things. 

1  But  cf.  Ps.  73 : 28,  “the  nearness  of  God  is  my  good.” 


THE  MORALS  OF  THE  PSALMS 


243 


145.  A  narrow  piety. — The  ideal  man  of  the  Psalter 
is  a  good  Jew.  His  characteristics  are  such  as  most 
good  men  covet  for  themselves.  He  is  modest,  but  self- 
respecting;  honest,  straightforward,  and  faithful,  gener¬ 
ous  and  kind.  He  would  be  distinctly  a  desirable 
citizen  in  any  Jewish  community.  But  he  is  first  and 
last  a  Jew.  He  has  been  ever  on  the  defensive  against 
the  rest  of  mankind  and  he  has  naturally  developed  no 
love  for  them.  He  hates  them  with  his  whole  soul. 
He  has  no  sense  of  obligation  to  the  world  at  large.  He 
assumes  no  responsibility  for  humanity.  His  heart 
does  not  beat  in  unison  with  the  heart  of  mankind. 
He  never  dreams  of  the  brotherhood  of  man  and  he  feels 
no  call  to  serve  the  race.  His  interests  and  energies 
are  centered  upon  himself  and  his  own  people.  He  is 
intensely  devoted  to  them  and  correspondingly  aloof 
from  the  rest  of  the  world.  He  is  narrow-minded  and 
exclusive  in  his  outlook  upon  life.  But  we  must  do  him 
justice  and  keep  in  mind  that  in  this  respect  he  was  no 
whit  inferior  to,  or  different  from,  the  world  in  general. 
The  conception  of  human  brotherhood  had  found  expres¬ 
sion  nowhere  else  in  the  world  at  that  time  and  the  nearest 
approach  to  it  was  in  the  writings  of  the  Jews  themselves. 
The  writers  of  the  Psalms  did  not  belong,  however,  to 
the  most  liberal  and  broad-minded  circles  of  the  Jewish 
people,  but  rather  to  those  who  stood  for  rigid  adherence 
to  the  old  paths.  They  were  orthodox  to  the  core. 

It  is  significant  that  it  was  the  good  fortune  of  this 
class  of  men  to  create  a  literature  that  has  ministered 
to  the  needs  of  the  pious,  both  Jew  and  Christian, 
through  the  succeeding  centuries.  The  Psalter  is  the 
best  known  and  most  used  book  of  the  Hebrew  Canon. 


244 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


The  literary  products  of  the  more  liberally  minded  Jews, 
greater  in  literary  excellence  and  broader  in  outlook, 
such  as  Job  and  Jonah  and  Isaiah  40-55,  never  achieved 
such  popularity  as  belongs  to  the  Psalter.  This  prefer¬ 
ence  for  the  Psalms  is  due  to  their  lyric  quality  on  the 
one  hand  and  to  their  genuinely  religious  fervor  on 
the  other.  Added  to  these  things  is  the  fact  that  the 
average  man  finds  his  own  ideals  and  experiences  inter¬ 
preted  for  him  in  the  Psalms  in  a  way  that  he  can 
easily  understand  and  thoroughly  appreciate.  The 
saint  of  the  Psalter  has  found  a  response  to  his  own 
outpourings  of  soul  in  the  hearts  of  the  saints  of  all 
the  ages. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 

146.  The  making  of  aphorisms  was  a  favorite  pastime 
in  the  ancient  Semitic  Orient.  That  it  wTas  popular  in 
early  Egypt  is  well  known  and  is  well  attested  by  the 
literature  that  has  survived  up  to  the  present  day.1  The 
Babylonians  and  Assyrians  likewise  treasured  pungent 
apothegms  and  passed  them  on  from  generation  to 
generation.2  The  Hebrew  tradition  posits  great  pro¬ 
verbial  activity  on  the  part  of  Solomon  and  Hezekiah, 
and  the  story  of  Samson  contains  one  or  two  homely 
maxims.3  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  proverb¬ 
making  was  not  freely  indulged  in  during  the  pre-exilic 
period;  and  it  is  quite  probable  that  the  nucleus  of  some 
of  the  collections  of  proverbs  now  found  assembled  in 
the  Book  of  Proverbs  was  gathered  before  the  Exile. 
But  the  Book  of  Proverbs  as  it  now  stands  is  probably  a 
product  of  the  early  Greek  period  in  Judaism,  and  may 
well  be  taken  as  representative  of  the  ethical  practice 
of  that  age  and  of  the  latter  part  of  the  Persian  period.4 

1  See,  for  example,  A.  H.  Gardiner,  The  Admonitions  of  an  Egyptian 
Sage  (1909);  G.  Maspero,  Les  enseignements  d’Amenemhait  Itr  d  son 
fils  Sanouasrit  Ier  (1914);  J.  H.  Breasted,  Development  of  Religion  and 
Thought  in  Ancient  Egypt  (1912),  Lecture  7;  F.  Pierret,  “Preceptes  de 
morale:  extraits  d’un  papyrus  demotique  du  Musee  du  Louvre,” 
Recueil  de  Travaux,  I,  40-46. 

2  See,  for  example,  R.  F.  Harper’s  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  Litera¬ 
ture  (1901),  pp.  448-50;  and  the  Proverbs  of  Ahikar  as  translated  in 
Charles’s  Apocrypha  and  Pseudipigrapha ,  II  (1913),  715-84. 

3  Prov.  1:1;  10:1;  25:1;  I  Kings  5:12;  Judg.  14: 14,  18. 

4  The  best  commentary  on  Proverbs  is  that  by  C.  H.  Toy  in  the 
International  Critical  Commentary. 


245 


246  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


The  Book  of  Ecclesiasticus,  or  more  exactly,  “The 
Wisdom  of  Jesus,  the  Son  of  Sirach,”  may  be  classed 
along  with  Proverbs.  It  arose  in  Alexandria  about  200 
b.c.  and  is  consequently  a  bit  later  than  the  Book  of 
Proverbs,  but  the  spirit  and  tone  of  the  two  works  are 
practically  identical  and  are  representative  of  the  ethics 
of  the  common  man  during  the  latter  part  of  the  history 
of  Judaism.1 

Proverbial  literature,  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case, 
cannot  and  does  not  move  in  the  forefront  of  thought. 
It  rather  gathers  up  the  approved  judgments  of  time. 
It  does  not  present  the  speculative  theories  of  pioneers, 
but  rather  the  platitudes  of  conventional  and  generally 
accepted  thought.  Hence  we  do  not  find  in  the  Books 
of  Proverbs  and  Ecclesiasticus  anything  strikingly  new 
in  the  field  of  ethics.  The  morals  of  these  writers  are 
those  of  the  orthodox  thinkers  and  represent  the  ideals 
of  the  average  man.  Indeed,  much  of  the  content  of 
these  maxims  is  of  that  ageless  variety  that  might  appear 
at  almost  any  time  in  a  well-ordered  and  highly  developed 
social  organization.  The  proverbs  deal  with  practical 
matters  and  record  the  results  of  the  observation  and 
experience  of  the  common  man. 

It  is  impracticable  here,  in  view  of  the  necessary  limits 
of  space,  to  scrutinize  closely  all  the  mass  of  material 
presented  in  Proverbs  and  Ecclesiasticus.  It  must 
suffice  us  to  note  the  outstanding  facts  and  to  limit 
the  illustrative  material  to  a  few  typical  cases.  Yet 
these  two  books  contain  more  positive,  direct,  and  con- 

1  The  best  English  commentary  on  Ecclesiasticus  is  W.  O.  E.  Oest- 
erley,  The  Wisdom  of  Jesus ,  the  Son  of  Sirach ,  or  Ecclesiasticus  in  the 
Revised  Version  with  Introduction  and  Notes  (Cambridge  Bible,  1912). 


THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 


247 


crete  moral  teaching  than  all  the  rest  of  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment  put  together.  All  that  we  shall  obtain  here  is  a 
bird’s-eye  view. 

147.  The  fundamental  principles  of  the  sages  are  two: 
(1)  that  religion  is  the  basis  of  all  true  wisdom,  knowledge, 
and  morals;  (2)  that  the  practice  of  religion  and  morality 
pays  dividends  in  real  goods.  The  first  of  these  principles 
finds  frequent  expression.  “The  fear  of  Yahweh  is  the 
beginning  of  knowledge”  (Prov.  1 : 7).1  All  wisdom  and 
knowledge  come  from  him  (Prov.  2:6).  Wisdom  includes 
justice  and  righteousness  (Prov.  8:20).  Yahweh  is  the 
omniscient  supervisor  and  administrator  of  the  moral 
universe  (Prov.  15  \f). 2 3  The  fear  of  God  is  the  highest 
good,  because  it  carries  with  it  all  other  goods: 

Wealth  and  strength  lift  up  the  heart; 

But  better  than  both  is  the  fear  of  God. 

In  the  fear  of  the  Lord  there  is  no  want, 

And  with  it  there  is  no  need  to  seek  [other]  help 
[Ecclus.  40: 2 6]. 3 

The  sage  never  imagined  the  possibility  of  a  separation 
between  religion  and  ethics.  In  his  eyes  no  man  could 
be  moral  who  denied  God  and  turned  his  back  upon 
religion. 

148.  That  piety  pays  is  the  constant  burden  of  the 
sages’  teachings.  Pay  your  first-fruits  and  your  barns 
will  overflow  (Prov.  3:9,  10)  .4  Live  righteously  and 
you  will  live  long;  but  live  wickedly  and  you  will  be 

1  So  also  Ecclus.  1 : 1 1-20. 

2  So  also  Prov.  16: 2,  4,  33;  17:3;  21:2;  22:2;  29:13. 

3  Similarly  Ecclus.  2:3,  7-1 1. 

4  So  also  Prov.  4: 18,  19;  10:3;  11:28,31;  12:3,12,13,28;  13:6, 
9,22;  14:11,19,34;  15:6,24;  16:7;  21:21;  22:4;  24:16;  25:5. 


c 


248  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


soon  cut  off  (Prov.  2 : 19-2 2). 1  The  righteous  has  a 
glad  outlook  before  his  eyes;  but  the  expectation  of  the 
wicked  will  perish  (Prov.  10:28);  and  “the  memory  of 
the  wicked  shall  rot ”  (Prov.  10:7).  For  such  minds 
there  is  no  problem  of  suffering.  A  facile  explanation  is 
furnished  by  the  old  theory  that  sin  is  responsible  for 
all  human  ills.  God  chastens  his  children  by  sending 
sufferings  upon  them  (Prov.  3:11,  12).  The  wicked  are 
not  to  be  an  occasion  of  envy  or  worry  though  they  may 
prosper  for  a  while,  for  their  prosperity  is  but  transient 
and  they  themselves  will  quickly  perish  (Prov.  24:19, 
20).  The  righteous,  on  the  other  hand,  is  delivered  out 
of  all  his  troubles,  and  the  role  of  sufferer  temporarily 
played  by  him  is  soon  taken  permanently  by  the  wicked 
(Prov.  11:8). 2 

149.  The  contents  of  the  terms  righteousness  and  wicked¬ 
ness  are  very  clearly  and  explicitly  listed  by  the  sages. 
We  can  do  little  here  but  name  the  virtues  and  the  vices 
enumerated  in  their  maxims,  and  we  shall  begin  with  the 
vices.  It  is  pleasant  to  find  the  sages  giving  far  more 
attention  to  positive  and  constructive  teaching  of  virtue 
than  to  mere  denunciation  of  sin.  They  were  not 
prophets  nor  preachers,  delighting  in  the  exposure  of 
evil,  but  quiet  souls  who  found  their  satisfaction  in 
making  virtue  attractive.  However,  they  leave  no 
doubt  as  to  the  severity  of  their  disapprobation  of  evil. 
They  warn  the  young  against  the  vice  of  greed  and 
covetousness,  together  with  the  envy  that  is  so  constant 
a  companion  of  these  two  corroding  sins.3  A  proud, 

1  So  also  Prov.  3 : 2 ;  4:10;  8:35,36;  9:11,18;  10:16,25,27,30; 
11:4,17-19,21;  12:7,21;  13:14;  16:31. 

2  Similarly  Ecclus.  16: 12-14. 

3  Prov.  1 : 10-19;  14:30;  15:27;  21:26;  28:16;  Ecclus.  14:3-19. 


THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 


249 


haughty,  and  arrogant  spirit  meets  with  emphatic  dis¬ 
approval1  and  the  havoc  wrought  by  hatred  is  vividly 
suggested.2  The  destructive  and  disruptive  power  of 
hate  is  sharply  contrasted  with  the  forgiving  and  healing 
grace  of  love: 

Hatred  stirreth  up  strifes; 

But  love  covereth  all  transgressions  [Prov.  10:12]. 

Much  attention  is  bestowed  upon  lying,  slander,  false 
witnessing,  and  talebearing.3  These  were  fruitful  causes 
of  discord  and  all  sorts  of  evil  machinations.  Downright 
murdfer  is  spoken  of  but  once  (Prov.  28:17);  but  harlotry 
and  adultery  are  the  occasion  of  much  warning.4  It  is 
suggestive  of  the  point  of  view  as  to  woman  that  the 
initial  responsibility  for  this  sin  is  in  every  case  but  one 
laid  either  directly  or  by  implication  upon  the  woman; 
the  man  in  the  case  is  evidently  but  a  poor  victim  who 
needs  protection!  The  one  exception  is  in  Ecclus. 
23:16-27,  where  the  man  is  given  the  blame  that  is 
rightly  due  him. 

150.  The  vice  of  drunkenness  is  depicted  in  telling 
terms  that  suggest  abundant  opportunity  for  observa¬ 
tion  of  its  evils  on  the  part  of  the  sages.s  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  they  recognized  a  legitimate  use  of  wine  and 
did  not  dream  of  prohibition.6  Personal  extravagance 

1  Prov. 11:2;  16:18,  19;  18:12;  21:4,  24;  29:23. 

2  Prov.  26:24-26. 

3  Prov.  6:12-19;  10:18;  12:17;  13:5;  14:5;  17:4,  7;  19:5,  9; 
20:19;  21:6,28;  24:28;  25:18;  26:28;  30:10;  Ecclus.  20: 24,  26. 

4 Prov.  5: 1-20;  6:24-35;  chap.  7;  22:14;  23:27,28;  29:3;  30:20; 
3i:3- 

s  Prov.  20:1;  23:20,  21,  29-35;  3i:4>  5- 

6  Prov.  31:6,  7. 


250 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


on  the  one  hand  and  parsimoniousness  on  the  other  are 
alike  rebuked.1  Gambling  is  referred  to  perhaps  once, 
but  naturally  in  an  unfavorable  way  (Ecclus.  14:15). 
The  more  elusive  sins  of  hypocrisy,  flattery,  deceit,  and 
cunning  are  abhorrent  to  the  sages’  zeal  for  honesty  and 
reality.2  The  lazy,  slothful,  indolent  man  comes  in  for 
frequent  remark  and  is  spared  no  sarcasm  or  stinging 
rebuke.3 

1 51.  The  social  offenses  listed  include  the  use  of  false 
weights  and  measures,4  the  hoarding  of  grain,5  various 
forms  of  robbery  and  oppression  of  the  poor,6  bribery,7 
the  curse  that  is  causeless,8  unfilial  cursing  of  parents,9 
charging  interest  upon  loans,10  and  returning  evil  for 
good.11  The  interests  of  the  sages  as  distinguished  from 
those  of  the  prophets  were  primarily  and  almost  exclu¬ 
sively  individualistic  rather  than  social.  Their  problems 
moved  in  the  field  of  personal  character  and  not  that  of 
social  or  national  well-being.  Group  interests  as  such 
receive  no  attention  from  them.  Even  the  influence  of 
the  group  life  upon  the  individual  is  untouched.  Soci¬ 
ology  both  in  name  and  in  content  was  to  them  terra 
incognita. 

152.  The  virtues  commended  by  the  sages  are  naturally 
in  large  part  the  opposite  of  the  vices  condemned. 


1  Prov.  11:24;  21:17;  Ecclus.  4:31;  14:3-7. 

2  Prov.  29:5;  Ecclus.  1:29;  5:9 — 6:1;  19:25,  28. 

3  Prov.  10:5;  15:19;  18:9;  19:15,  24;  20:4,  13;  21:25;  22:13; 
23:21;  24:30-34;  26:13,  I45  Ecclus.  22:1,  2. 

4  Prov.  11  :i;  16:11;  20:10,23.  8  Prov.  26:2. 

s  Prov.  11:26.  9  Prov.  20 : 20. 

6  Prov.  14:31;  22:22,28;  23:10;  28:3,6.  10 Prov.  28:8. 

7  Prov.  15:27;  18:16;  29:4.  11  Prov.  17: 13. 


THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 


251 


Reverence  for  parents  is  one  of  the  outstanding  charac¬ 
teristics  of  the  good  man.1  The  filial  spirit  reflected  in 
these  utterances  is  beyond  praise.  Piety  toward  parents 
is  effective  in  making  atonement  for  sin.  Father  and 
mother  alike  deserve  and  must  receive  every  consid¬ 
eration  : 

My  son,  help  thy  father  in  his  old  age. 

And  grieve  him  not  all  the  days  of  his  life. 

Alms  to  a  father  shall  not  be  blotted  out, 

And  it  shall  stand  firm  as  a  substitute  for  sin. 

In  the  day  of  trouble  it  shall  be  remembered, 

Obliterating  thine  iniquities  as  heat  the  hoar-frost. 

As  one  that  is  arrogant  is  he  that  despiseth  his  father, 

And  as  one  that  provoketh  his  Creator  is  he  that  curseth 
his  mother  [Ecclus.  3:12-16]. 

A  proper  regard  for  the  aged  is  also  required  of  the 
good  man.2  Kindness  to  one’s  fellow-man  and  even  to 
animals  is  praiseworthy.3  Mercy  and  truth  are  joined 
together  and  are  given  great  weight  in  the  scales  of 
merit;  like  charity  they  “ cover  a  multitude  of  sins.”4 
The  commonplace  but  essential  virtue  of  industry  is 
greatly  stressed.5  It  is  the  outstanding  characteristic 
of  the  ideal  wife.6  The  idea  that  the  good  man  need 
only  trust  in  God  to  take  care  of  him  was  far  from  the 
sage’s  mind.  His  philosophy  of  life  was  rather,  “God 
helps  those  who  help  themselves.”  As  a  companion 

1  Prov.  1 : 8,  9;  6:20;  15:5,20;  19:26;  23:22-25;  28:7;  30:11,  17; 
Ecclus.  3 : 1-16;  16:1-5. 

2  Ecclus.  8:6,  9. 

3  Prov.  12:10;  19:17. 

4 Prov.  3:3;  16:6;  20:28. 

s  Prov.  6:6-11;  10:4;  12:11,24,27;  13:4;  21:5;  22:29;  28:19. 

6  Prov.  31:13,  15,  18,  19,  22,  24,  27. 


252 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


virtue  to  industry,  frugality  is  approved.  The  proverb 
on  this  subject  would  serve  as  an  excellent  motto  for  the 
modern  savings  bank : 

Wealth  gotten  in  haste  shall  be  diminished, 

But  he  that  gathers  little  by  little  shall  increase 
[Prov.  13:11]. 

Amid  all  the  toil  and  saving  there  must  be  a  contented 
mind: 

The  chief  requisites  of  life  are  water  and  bread, 

And  a  garment,  and  a  house  to  cover  nakedness: 

Better  the  life  of  a  poor  man  under  a  shelter  of  logs, 

Than  sumptuous  fare  among  strangers. 

Be  contented  with  little  or  much  [Ecclus.  29:21-23]. 

In  the  midst  of  one’s  own  prosperity,  thought  should  be 
taken  for  the  unfortunate.  Charity  and  generosity  toward 
the  needy  are  given  much  emphasis.1  Prompt  aid  is 
commended  in  contrast  to  the  procrastinating  kind  that 
delays  relief  when  it  might  be  immediately  available. 
The  man  who  finds  satisfaction  in  the  distresses  of  his 
fellows  is  classed  with  him  who  blasphemes  God.  By 
Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach,  almsgiving  is  accorded  merit 
as  atoning  for  sin.2  The  prophet’s  emphasis  upon  the 
supreme  importance  of  justice  and  righteousness  is 
echoed  in  some  of  the  sages’  maxims.3 

To  do  righteousness  and  justice 

Is  more  acceptable  to  Yahweh  than  sacrifice  [Prov.  21:3]. 

1  Prov.  3:27,  28;  11:25;  17:5;  19:17;  21:13;  22:9,16;  28:27; 

Ecclus.  4: 1-5;  7:10. 

3  Ecclus.  3:30;  4: 10. 

3  Prov.  3 : 29,  30;  16:12;  18:5;  20:7;  21:15,18;  24:23-26;  29:2, 
6,  7,  14,  16,  27;  31:9;  Ecclus.  4:30;  21:4,  8. 


THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 


253 


The  sages’  advocacy  of  justice  is  wholly  lacking  in  the 
passion  that  was  so  characteristic  of  the  prophet,  nor 
does  it  have  much  in  mind  the  national  interest  that  lay 
so  near  to  the  heart  of  the  prophet.  Their  concern  is 
rather,  on  the  whole,  with  the  relationship  of  justice  to 
personal  character. 

153.  The  value  of  friendship  is  set  very  high;  and 
the  nature  and  function  of  friendship  are  correctly  inter¬ 
preted.  The  true  friend  is  sharply  differentiated  from 
the  fair-weather  friend.1  Much  advice  and  encourage¬ 
ment  are  given  toward  the  development  of  self-control.2 
Anger  is  especially  the  subject  of  warning.3  The  evils 
of  quarrelsomeness  are  vividly  depicted;4  and  hasty 
speech  is  earnestly  deprecated.5  A  fitting  spirit  of 
humility  is  urged  upon  the  good  man;6  at  the  same 
time  he  is  bidden  not  to  descend  too  low  in  his  own 
estimation  but  to  maintain  a  proper  self-esteem.  If  he 
does  not  value  himself,  who  else  will  value  him  (Ecclus. 
10: 29) ? 

154.  The  attitude  of  the  sages  toward  foreigners  seems 
to  have  become  more  pronouncedly  hostile  with  the 
progress  of  time.  Wisdom  teaching  on  the  whole  seems 
to  have  been  broad  and  human  in  its  reactions.  In 
Proverbs  little,  if  any,  allusion  is  made  to  distinctions 
between  Jew  and  non- Jew.  It  is,  of  course,  true  that 
the  thought  of  the  sage  did  not  positively  include  the 

1  Prov.  18:24;  Ecclus.  6:5-17;  12:8 — 13:1. 

2  Prov.  29:11,  20;  Ecclus.  6:2-4;  8:11;  18:30 — 19:3. 

3  Prov.  14:29;  15:18;  16:32;  17:1;  19:11,19;  22:24;  Ecclus.  1:22. 

4  Prov.  17:14;  26:21;  Ecclus.  8: 1-3. 

5  Prov,  13:3;  17:7,  28;  21:23;  Ecclus.  19:4-12;  23:7-15. 

6  Prov.  15:33;  18:12;  29:23;  Ecclus.  3:17-25;  7:4-7. 


254 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


interests  of  foreigners,  but  at  the  same  time  it  did  not 
descend  to  hatred  and  hostility  toward  aliens.  In 
Proverbs  there  is  no  indubitable  criticism  of  or  warning 
^against  foreigners.1  In  the  Wisdom  of  Jesus,  son  of 
Sirach,  however,  the  old-time  hatred  of  Edom,  Philistia, 
and  the  Samaritans  reasserts  itself.2  Conversely,  the 
thought  of  Israel  as  God’s  favored  nation  is  confidently 
expressed : 

For  every  nation  he  appointed  a  ruler, 

But  Israel  is  the  Lord’s  portion  [Ecclus.  17:17]. 

155.  The  family. — The  sages  give  a  great  deal  of 
consideration  to  questions  relating  to  women  and 
children.  They  recognize  fully  that  children  are-  not 
infrequently  a  source  of  grief  and  anxiety;3  and  they 
lay  stress  upon  the  necessity  of  discipline  in  youth  that 
the  child  may  grow  up  aright.4  They  commend  cor¬ 
poral  punishment,  but  would  not  have  it  go  too  far.5 

Withhold  not  chastisement  from  the  child; 

If  thou  beat  him  with  the  rod,  he  will  not  die. 

Thou  must  beat  him  with  the  rod, 

And  thus  rescue  him  from  Sheol  [Prov.  23:13,  14]. 

Good  children  are  highly  prized,  being  looked  upon  as  the 
most  desirable  proof  of  the  favor  of  God.6  There  is  no 
insight  into  either  principles  or  methods  of  elementary 
or  secondary  education.  Knowledge  and  morals  alike 
must  be  inculcated  by  the  use  of  the  rod. 

1  The  “strange”  woman  of  Proverbs  is  not  a  foreigner  but  rather 
the  wife  of  another  man  than  the  person  addressed.  Cf.  Toy’s  rendering 
of  Prov.  20:16;  27:13. 

2  Ecclus.  50: 25,  26.  3  Prov.  r7: 21,  25;  19:13.  4  Prov.  22:6. 

s  Prov.  13:24;  19:18;  22:15;  29:15,  I7>  21  j  Ecclus.  30:1-13. 

6  Prov.  17:6. 


THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 


255 


Wives,  too,  are  not  uniformly  satisfactory.  Quarrel¬ 
some  wives  seem  to  have  been  of  very  common  occur¬ 
rence.1  Two  types  of  wives  are  regarded  as  intolerable; 
viz.,  the  woman  lacking  winsomeness  who  at  last  obtains 
a  husband  only  to  find  that  he  comes  to  hate  her,  and 
the  maidservant,  who  succeeds  in  supplanting  her 
mistress.2  Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach,  is  more  dubious 
about  women  than  the  earlier  proverb-makers  were.  He 
bids  the  husband  trust  his  wife,  but  fight  shy  of  all  other 
women  lest  he  fall  into  trouble.3  He  becomes  almost 
savage  in  his  tirade  against  bad  wives : 

Any  wickedness,  only  not  the  wickedness  of  a  woman. 

There  is  no  wrath  above  the  wrath  of  a  woman. 

There  is  little  malice  like  the  malice  of  a  woman. 

From  a  woman  did  sin  originate, 

And  because  of  her  we  all  must  die  [Ecclus.  25:13-26]. 

He  would  protect  men  from  the  dangers  lurking  in  the 
ways  of  bad  women  and  so  he  paints  them  in  vivid 
colors.4  In  the  same  sort  of  tone,  he  talks  about  the 
worry  in  which  daughters  involve  their  parents;  and  he 
closes  his  words  upon  this  theme  with  this  preposterous 
statement : 

For  from  the  garment  cometh  forth  the  moth, 

And  from  a  woman  a  woman’s  wickedness. 

Better  the  wickedness  of  a  man  than  the  goodness  of  a 
woman, 

And  a  daughter  that  causeth  shame  and  poureth  forth 
reproach  [Ecclus.  42:9-14]. 

But  the  sages  were  not  blind  to  the  merits  of  women; 
and  they  frequently  give  them  the  highest  praise.  The 

1  Prov.  19:13;  21:9,  19;  25:24;  27:15,  16. 

2  Prov.  30:23.  ^ Ecclus.  9: 1-9.  4 Ecclus.  26:5-12. 


256  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


good  wife  is  a  much  coveted  treasure  for  which  Yahweh 
is  to  be  thanked.  Jesus,  son  of  Sirach,  joins  with  the  older 
sages  in  generous  praise  of  such  women,1  but  he  cannot 
even  in  this  connection  refrain  from  a  sly  fling  at  their 
volubility: 

A  silent  woman  is  a  gift  from  the  Lord  [Ecclus.  26:14]. 

In  his  scale  of  values,  given  in  chapter  40,  he  places 
woman  very  high.2  The  most  attractive  picture  of 
womanhood,  however,  is  that  presented  in  Prov. 
31:10-31.  The  first  fine  of  this  panegyric,  as  rendered 
in  the  English  Bible,  casts  a  slur  upon  womanhood 
that  was  far  from  the  writer’s  thought.  The  word 
“virtuous”  here  has  no  reference  to  sexual  purity,  but 
is  used  in  the  old  English  sense  related  to  the  Latin 
virtus.  The  Hebrew  is  difficult  to  reproduce  exactly; 
but  we  may  use  some  such  adjective  as  “worthful,” 
“forceful,”  or  “capable.”  The  kind  of  wife  meant  is 
the  one  described  in  the  poem  that  follows.  It  is  admitted 
that  such  a  wife  is  difficult  to  obtain,  but  when  found  she 
is  of  incalculable  value.  She  has  indefatigable  energy 
and  executive  capacity.  She  is  generous  and  charitable 
to  the  poor.  She  dresses  well  and  takes  excellent  care 
of  her  husband  and  household.  She  is  wise  and  kindly 
and  commands  the  confidence  of  her  husband  and  the 
esteem  and  affection  of  her  children.  Such  an  ideal 
fails  to  include  many  things  that  characterize  the  ideal 
woman  of  today.  It  confines  woman’s  sphere  of  activity 
to  the  home  and  family.  It  gives  her  no  voice  in  the 
affairs  of  town  and  state.  It  leaves  no  time  for  the 

1  Prov.  12:4;  18:22;  19:14;  Ecclus.  26:1-4,  13-18;  36:21-26;  40:23. 

3  Ecclus.  40:19,  23. 


THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 


257 


culture  of  the  so-called  “fine  arts.”  It  puts  no  emphasis 
upon  intellectual  attainments  of  the  more  specialized 
kind.  It  leaves  her  social  interests  unmentioned.  But 
judged  by  the  standards  of  the  times,  the  soundness  of 
this  view  of  woman  cannot  be  too  highly  estimated. 
The  things  which  engage  this  woman’s  energies  are  all 
in  themselves  good.  As  far  as  she  goes  she  is  thoroughly 
praiseworthy.  A  people  in  that  period  with  a  concep¬ 
tion  of  ideal  womanhood  as  essentially  good  as  this  was 
in  the  forefront  of  moral  progress.  Other  peoples  might 
praise  their  women  for  their  beauty  and  physical  charms; 
the  Jew,  though  not  despising  the  beautiful,  places  his 
highest  estimate  upon  moral  excellence.  He  praises  the 
homely,  household  virtues  of  industry,  wisdom,  and 
loving-kindness. 

156.  The  general  characteristics  of  the  wisdom  found 
in  the  moral  maxims  of  the  sages  are  readily  recognizable. 
Their  observations  reveal  a  marked  degree  of  practicality 
and  shrewd  common  sense.1  They  face  the  everyday 
problem  of  life,  “how  can  I  live  a  happy,  prosperous 
life,  esteemed  by  my  fellow-men  and  enjoying  the  favor 
of  God?”  In  their  manifold  answer,  they  display  a 
keen  insight  into  human  nature  and  an  open-eyed  recogni¬ 
tion  of  facts,  e.g., 

A  man’s  gift  makes  room  for  him, 

And  brings  him  before  great  men  [Prov.  18:16]. 

A  gift  in  secret  turns  away  anger, 

And  a  present  in  the  bosom  violent  wrath  [Prov.  21:14]. 

To  have  respect  of  persons  is  not  good — 

For  a  piece  of  bread  a  man  may  sin  [Prov.  28:21]. 

1  Prov.  10:15;  14:20;  16:26;  19:4,  6,  7;  20:6,  14;  27:10,  21; 
29:12;  Ecclus.  13:21-23;  27:2;  31:5-11. 


258  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


They  do  not  lack  an  occasional  glint  of  humor;  for  ex¬ 
ample,  in  the  warning  against  garrulity,  we  come  across 
this: 

Hast  thou  heard  anything?  Let  it  die  with  thee; 

Be  of  good  courage,  it  will  not  burst  thee  [Ecclus.  19:10!! 

One  of  the  prevailing  notes  of  the  sages  is  caution. 
They  would  not  have  men  give  way  to  wild  enthusiasms, 
or  indulge  in  venturesome  enterprises.  A  man  should 
keep  to  safe  and  sure  methods  and  principles.  There¬ 
fore,  a  man  should  be  slow  to  go  surety  for  debts,  for  he 
may  have  to  pay  them.1  The  sage  desires  for  himself 
a  moderate  and  well-balanced  life  that  avoids  extremes, 
either  of  poverty  or  riches.2  He  cautions  his  disciples 
against  trusting  in  wealth  and  warns  them  against 
trying  to  get  rich  quickly3  Practical  jokes  are  put  upon 
his  list  of  prohibitions.4  The  wise  will  seek  the  guidance 
of  good  counselors,  and  the  prosperity  of  the  state 
depends  upon  such  counsel.5 

157.  Pragmatic  morals. — The  ethics  of  the  sages  can 
hardly  escape  the  charge  of  being  prevailingly  utilitarian. 
There  is  constantly  held  up  before  the  disciple  the  prac¬ 
tical  good  to  be  derived  by  following  the  course  of  con¬ 
duct  laid  down.  It  is  a  high  level  of  utilitarianism  upon 
which  the  thought  of  the  sages  moves,  far  above  a  merely 
material  and  sensuous  interpretation  of  life.  But  there 
is  scant  recognition  of  the  power  and  beauty  of  ideals  as 

IProv.6:i~5;  11:15;  17:18;  20:16;  22:26,27;  Ecclus.  8: 12,  13; 
29:14-20. 

2  Prov.  30: 7-9.  3  Prov.  1 : 10—19;  20:21;  23:4,5;  28:20,22. 

4  Prov.  26:18,  19;  cf.  Ecclus.  8:4. 

sProv.  11:14;  cf.  29:18,  where  Toy  would  substitute  for  “ vision” 
some  such  word  as  “guidance.” 


THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 


259 


such.  There  is  but  little  evidence  of  the  thought  that 
“ virtue  is  its  own  reward.”  “Be  good,  because  it  pays 
dividends  in  prosperity,  esteem  and  happiness,”  is  the 
sages’  advice;  not,  “be  good,  because  goodness  is  a 
blessed  thing  in  and  of  itself.”1  In  addition  to  this  defect 
the  ethics  of  these  maxims  is  in  the  main  egoistic,  indi¬ 
vidualistic,  and  self-centered.  There  is  little  trace  of 
altruism  or  of  social  interest.  The  thought  of  the  indi¬ 
vidual  as  living  for  the  good  of  the  whole  rather  than  for 
his  own  self-interest  is  scarcely  perceptible.  A  man  has 
certain  positive  obligations,  it  is  true,  to  parent’s  and 
children  and  to  the  poor  and  weak;  and  he  is  expected 
to  conduct  himself  toward  the  community  at  large  as 
a  decent  citizen;  but  there  is  no  thought  of  any  direct 
and  positive  obligation  on  the  part  of  a  citizen  to  strive 
for  the  betterment  of  society  or  to  work  for  the  progress 
of  the  state.  The  vision  of  the  sages  moves  within  a 
restricted  area  and  does  not  extend  to  the  farthest 
confines  of  his  world.  He  lived  too  early  in  history  for 
this  larger  world-view  to  have  been  possible  for  him. 

The  method  of  the  sages  is  not  synthetic,  but  ato¬ 
mistic.  There  may  have  been  in  their  minds  certain 
great  underlying  ethical  unities;  but,  if  so,  they  never 
came  to  expression.  They  talk  not  in  terms  of  character 
but  in  those  of  action.  Life  for  them  consists  in  deeds; 
and  a  man  is  judged  by  his  acts  rather  than  by  his 
motives.  On  the  other  hand,  the  sages  recognize 
certain  great  moral  principles  to  which  a  man  must 
adjust  himself  if  he  would  succeed.  They  constitute 
a  sort  of  moral  law,  the  mandates  of  which  are  inexorable. 
In  the  words  of  Professor  C.  H.  Toy: 

1  Cf.  Prov.  11:17;  14:30;  15:15. 


26o 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


The  sages  set  forth  a  natural  law  in  the  moral  world,  which 
is  no  more  capable  of  pity  than  physical  law;  the  rule  is:  be  wise 
or  perish — it  is  the  rule  of  the  ethical  philosopher,  not  of  the 
patriot  or  the  preacher.  In  this  respect,  as  in  others,  we  are 
struck  by  the  modernness  of  Proverbs:  prophets  and  historians 
often  seem  remote  from  us,  and  sometimes  even  the  psalms;  but 
Proverbs  might  almost  have  been  written  yesterday.1 

158.  A  melancholy  note  is  occasionally  sounded  by  the 
sages.  They  were  too  wide-awake  to  ignore  completely 
the  tragic  element  in  life,  notwithstanding  their  view 
that  all  things  work  together  for  good  to  them  that  fear 
God.  Sorrow  is  common  to  all;2  and  outward  manifesta¬ 
tions  of  joy  sometimes  conceal  inner  grief.3  This  prev¬ 
alence  of  sorrow  is  explicable,  for  all  men  are  guilty  of 
sin.4  No  man  may  be  adjudged  happy  till  he  dies,  for 
death  may  reveal  the  saddening  truth.5  Death  is  the 
end  of  all  men;6  and  the  wicked  die  prematurely.7 
There  is  no  outlook  beyond  the  grave,  and  life  is  too  short 
to  permit  full  attainment  of  all  possibilities: 

For  all  things  cannot  be  in  men, 

For  a  son  of  man  is  not  immortal  [Ecclus.  17:30]. 

But  even  so,  the  tragedy  of  life  is  not  allowed  to  obscure 
the  joy.  The  good  man  is  no  pessimist.  He  enters 
fully  into  the  joy  of  living: 

The  path  of  the  righteous  is  like  the  light  of  the  dawn, 

Which  shines  ever  brighter  till  the  full  day  comes 
[Prov.  4:18]. 

The  good  man  carries  a  glad  heart,  which  is  an  antidote 
for  sickness  and  sorrow.8  The  wicked  are  prostrated  by 

1  Encyclopedia  Biblica,  col.  3914. 

2  Prov.  14:10.  4  Prov.  20:9.  6  Ecclus.  7:17;  4i:I-4~ 

3  Prov.  14:13.  s  Ecclus.  11 :  28.  7 Prov.  10:27;  11:7. 

8  Prov.  10:22;  14:30;  15:13,15;  17:22;  29:6;  Ecclus.  1:11  2. 


1HE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES 


261 


misfortune,  but  the  righteous  has  confidence  in  trouble 
because  of  his  integrity.1  He  may  trust  Yahweh  and 
need  not  envy  the  wicked,  because  his  hope  for  reward 
will  not  come  to  naught.2  Men  reap  what  they  sow; 
and  the  pious  may  count  upon  full  fruition  of  their  hopes.3 
Good  advice  is  given  to  mourners,  though  perhaps  it 
does  seem  a  bit  unfeeling  and  cold-blooded,  not  to  say 
hypocritical.4  But  mourning  is  not  to  be  allowed  to 
dominate  a  life.  Death  is  the  common  lot  of  man,  and 
is  to  be  accepted  in  a  philosophical  spirit. 

159.  Moral  heights. — In  bringing  this  chapter  to  a 
close,  we  shall  note  some  of  the  highest  levels  attained 
by  these  sages.  Wealth  is  by  no  means  their  highest 
good.  Wisdom  far  transcends  it.5  Love  in  a  cottage 
is  better  than  hatred  in  a  palace.6  Poverty  is  far  from 
being  the  worst  misfortune.7  Truthfulness  and  a  good 
reputation  are  better  than  riches.8  Sound  knowledge  is 
the  best  of  jewels.9  In  the  scale  of  values  formulated 
by  Jesus,  son  of  Sirach,10  the  prizes  are  awarded  to  wisdom, 
true  love  between  man  and  woman,  purity  of  speech, 
a  “discreet  wife,”  righteousness,  good  counsel,  and  best  • 
of  all — the  fear  of  God.  Emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  inner 
life  as  the  source  of  all  activities.11  The  ethical  content  of 
religion  is  stressed  even  as  by  the  prophets.12  True 

1  Prov.  14:32;  cf.  Toy’s  Commentary,  in  loc. 

2  Prov.  23:18;  24:19,  20. 

3  Ecclus.  3: 26-31;  14:1. 

4  Ecclus.  38:16-23. 

s  Prov.  3:13-15;  8:11,  19;  16:16;  Ecclus.  10:30 — 11 : 1. 

6  Prov.  15:16,  17.  8  Prov.  22:1.  10  Ecclus.  40:18-27. 

7 Prov.  19:22.  9  Prov.  20:15.  11  Prov.  4:23. 

12  Prov.  15 : 18 f ;  21:27;  Ecclus.  34:19 — 35:17. 


262 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


friendship  is  highly  exalted;1  the  demands  made  upon 
long-suffering  human  nature  by  the  sages  are  not  light. 
Even  if  a  borrower  is  ungrateful,  the  good  must  keep  on 
lending  to  him.2  The  lex  talionis  is  discarded;  the  good 
man  will  not  repay  the  one  who  wrongs  him  “  tit  for  tat,” 
but  will  forgive  that  he  himself  may  be  forgiven.3  Nor 
will  he  humiliate  the  penitent,  for  he  will  bear  in  mind 
that  all  men  are  sinners.4  The  good  will  not  even 
exult  over  the  misfortunes  of  the  wicked,  for  that  might 
lead  Yahweh  to  turn  away  his  wrath  from  the  wicked! 
Behind  this  rather  shocking  sentiment  there  is  a  feeling 
that  it  is  unseemly  to  delight  in  the  afflictions  of 
others.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  with  its  “if  thine 
enemy  hunger,  feed  him,”  etc.,  is  anticipated  in  Prov. 
25:21,  22,  but  the  motive  is  somewhat  mixed. 

For  thou  wilt  heap  coals  of  fire  upon  his  head, 

And  Yahweh  will  reward  thee. 

The  spirit  that  animated  the  Jews  in  the  terrible  strug¬ 
gle  against  Antiochus  Epiphanes  finds  stirring  expression 
in  Ecclus.  4:28: 

Strive  for  the  right  till  death, 

And  the  Lord  will  reward  thee. 

Jesus,  son  of  Sirach,  lays  down  clearly  the  proposition 
that  the  will  of  man  is  free.  He  is  not  a  mere  pawn  upon 
the  chess-board.  He  is  master  of  his  own  destiny.  He 
must  fight  out  his  battle  with  his  own  evil  nature,5  and 
victory  is  within  his  reach: 

1  Prov.  17:17;  Ecclus.  14:13.  3  Prov.  24:29;  Ecclus.  27:30 — 28:7. 

2  Ecclus.  29:1-13.  4  Ecclus.  8:5. 

s  Ecclus.  15: 14;  cf.  the  article  by  F.  C.  Porter  on  “The  Yecer 
Hara — A  Study  in  the  Jewish  Doctrine  of  Sin,”  in  Biblical  and  Semitic 
Studies ,  Critical  and  Historical  Essays  by  the  Members  of  the  Biblical  and 
Semitic  Faculty  of  Yale  University  (1901),  pp.  93-156. 


THE  MORAL  MAXIMS  OF  THE  SAGES  263 


If  thou  desirest,  thou  canst  keep  the  commandment, 

And  it  is  wisdom  to  do  his  good  pleasure, 

And  if  thou  trust  him,  of  a  truth  thou  shalt  live. 

Poured  out  before  thee  are  fire  and  water, 

Stretch  forth  thy  hand  unto  that  which  thou  desirest. 

Life  and  death  are  before  man, 

That  which  he  desires  shall  be  given  him 
[Ecclus.  15:15-17]. 

There  is  no  citation  of  authority  by  the  sages.  They 
do  not  seek  to  add  any  extraneous  influence  to  their 
utterances.  They  proceed  rather  upon  the  view  that 
“  truth  is  its  own  best  witness.”  So  they  are  content  to 
state  the  truth  as  they  see  it  and  to  allow  it  to  make  its 
own  unaided  appeal  to  the  hearts  of  men.  They  have 
enough  confidence  in  human  nature  to  believe  that  it 
will  respond  to  the  best  in  life  when  that  is  presented  and 
they  sincerely  believe  that  they  have  the  best. 


CHAPTER  XIII 


A  SAINT  UNDER  FIRE 

160.  The  Book  of  Job  is  one  of  the  masterpieces  of 
world  literature.  It  deals  with  the  eternally  insoluble 
problem  of  suffering.  It  represents  an  ideal  man  as  the 
victim  of  hostile  circumstances  losing  all  that  men  hold 
dear,  save  life  itself,  yet  holding  fast  to  his  integrity. 
His  sufferings  constitute  the  theme  of  discussion  between 
him  and  three  of  his  friends.  They  argue  that  his 
misfortunes  demonstrate  his  sinfulness;  he  repudiates 
the  charge  and  challenges  the  moral  order  of  the  universe. 
He  has,  on  the  whole,  the  better  of  the  argument.  But 
he  and  his  friends  are  alike  rebuked  and  corrected  by 
Yahweh  himself  in  a  speech  which  forms  the  climax  of 
the  book.  Thereupon  Job  is  restored  to  his  former 
prosperity,  and  his  friends  are  forgiven  for  his  sake. 

161.  The  theme  of  the  book  is  as  old  as  the  thought  of 
man.  The  ancient  Egyptians  had  dealt  with  it  early  in 
their  literary  history;1  and  the  old  Babylonians  had  also 
given  it  serious  thought.2  The  Book  of  Job  itself  takes 
an  old  story  as  its  basis  and  sets  itself  the  task  of  proving 
that  the  old  solution  of  the  problem  of  suffering  is  no 
solution  at  all.  The  point  of  view  of  the  author  of  the 
book  is  independent  and  creative.  Naturally  it  did  not 
commend  itself  to  some  minds  and  they  sought  to  supple¬ 
ment  it  and  correct  it  by  the  addition  of  new  material. 

1  See  James  H.  Breasted,  The  Development  of  Religion  and  Thought 
in  Ancient  Egypt  (1912),  pp.  188  £f. 

2  See  George  A.  Barton,  Archaeology  and  the  Bible  (1916),  pp.  392-97. 

264 


A  SAINT  UNDER  FIRE 


265 


Such  additions  are  represented  particularly  by  the 
speeches  of  Elihu  (chaps.  32-37),  and  a  large  section  of 
the  speech  of  Yahweh  (40:6 — 41:34),  and  the  description 
of  Wisdom  in  chapter  28. 1 

162.  The  development  of  the  thought  of  the  book, 
compellingly  interesting  as  it  is,  cannot  be  followed 
through  here  step  by  step.  We  shall  rather  analyze  and 
summarize  the  contribution  of  the  discussion  to  the  prob¬ 
lem  of  suffering,  hoping  that  this  will  send  some  readers 
to  the  Book  of  Job  itself  for  direct  contact  with  the 
author’s  thought  in  all  its  beauty  and  power.  The 
problem  of  the  book,  more  precisely  formulated,  is  this: 
How  can  the  fact  of  suffering  on  the  part  of  the  good  be 
best  accounted  for  in  a  supposedly  moral  universe  and 
under  the  administration  of  a  moral  God?  Or,  more 
succinctly  stated,  is  God  moral?  There  are  several 
responses  to  these  queries  in  the  Book  of  Job,  and  to  these 
we  now  turn. 

163.  The  theory  of  life  held  by  Job  and  the  three 
friends  alike  is  to  the  effect  that  the  pious  life  ought  to 
be  the  prosperous  life  and  conversely,  the  wicked  should 
suffer.  The  difference  between  the  friends  and  Job  is 
that  they  say  that  life  is  actually  organized  and  admin¬ 
istered  upon  the  basis  of  this  principle;  while  Job  declares 
emphatically  that  it  is  not.  Herein  lies  Job’s  problem. 
The  pious  ought  to  be  rewarded  for  their  piety,  and  the 
wicked  ought  to  suffer  for  their  sin;  but  the  experiences 

1  The  best  English  books  on  Job  are:  S.  R.  Driver  and  G.  Buchanan 
Gray,  The  Book  of  Job  (International  Critical  Commentary,  1921); 
A.  S.  Peake,  The  Book  of  Job  (New  Century  Bible,  1904);  A.  B.  David¬ 
son  and  H.  C.  O.  Lanchester,  The  Book  of  Job  (Cambridge  Bible,  1918); 
Morris  Jastrow,  Jr.,  The  Book  of  Job  (1920);  M.  Buttenwieser,  The  Book 
of  Job  (1922). 


2  66 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


of  life  show  that  this  is  not  the  way  in  which  things 
really  go.  Job  is  represented  by  the  author  as  having 
lived  the  pious  life  par  excellence  (Job  i :  8),  and  as  having 
received  his  appropriate  reward  of  material  prosperity  up 
to  the  point  at  which  the  story  begins  (Job  i :  1-5).  The 
moral  elements  in  the  life  of  such  a  man  are  of  particular 
interest  and  value  for  our  study.  A  catalogue  of  Job’s  vir¬ 
tues  is  given  in  his  apologia  pro  vita  sua  found  in  chapters 
29-31.  The  moral  qualities  here  listed  are  of  course 
representative  of  the  highest  ideal  of  life  in  the  period 
from  which  the  Book  of  Job  comes.  Job  declares  him¬ 
self  to  have  been  a  ready  helper  of  the  poor  and  weak. 
Orphans  and  widows  found  in  him  succor  and  strong 
defense  against  the  oppressor.1  He  even  felt  himself  to 
be  brother  to  his  slaves.2  He  was  always  to  be  found 
upon  the  side  of  justice  and  righteousness  and  was  of 
impeccable  honesty.3  He  was  possessed  of  a  cheerful, 
buoyant  disposition  which  made  him  an  encouragement 
and  joy  to  his  fellows.4  He  eschewed  all  forms  of  insin¬ 
cerity  and  deceit,5  and  had  no  consciousness  of  any  secret 
sins.6  He  was  wholly  free  from  sexual  taint,  avoiding 
even  impure  thoughts,  much  more  acts  of  shame.7  He 
disclaimed  all  undue  esteem  for  wealth  and  declared  that 
he  never  put  his  hope  and  confidence  in  his  riches.8  He 
shared  his  abundance  with  the  less  fortunate  and  prac¬ 
ticed  a  liberal  hospitality  both  toward  his  neighbors  and 
toward  travelers.9  He  had  been  faithful  to  all  obliga¬ 
tions  arising  out  of  his  position  as  a  holder  and  tiller  of 

1  Job  29: 12-17;  31 : 16-20.  4  Job  29: 21-15.  7job3i:i,  9. 

a  Job  31:13-15.  s  Job  31:5.  8  Job  31:24,  25. 

8  Job  29:14,  16&,  17;  31:7.  6  Job  31:33,  34-  9  Job  31:31,  32. 


A  SAINT  UNDER  FIRE 


267 


the  soil.1  Best  of  all,  he  did  not  find  any  satisfaction  in 
the  misfortunes  of  his  personal  enemies,  nor  had  he  ever 
called  down  curses  upon  them.2  A  survey  of  these 
claims  will  reveal  that  there  is  here  nothing  new.  All 
these  ideals  have  found  expression  already  in  the  earlier 
literature.  The  unusual  thing  is  that  these  virtues  are 
all  concentrated  in  one  ideal  person,  so  that  Job  becomes 
a  man  without  a  flaw.  But  Job’s  pre-eminence  is  not  so 
much  in  the  realm  of  deeds,  as  in  that  of  thought.  It  is 
in  the  quality  of  his  mind  and  its  courage  and  strength, 
as  revealed  in  the  long  debate,  that  his  supremacy  lies. 

164.  The  setting  of  the  problem  is  given  in  the  Prologue 
to  the  Book  of  Job  (chaps.  1-2).  The  perfect  man,  Job, 
is  held  up  by  Yahweh  as  a  character  beyond  reproach. 
The  Satan  challenges  this  proposition,  intimating  that 
there  is  no  such  thing  among  men  as  disinterested  piety 
(Job  1:9-11).  Job  has  been  good  because  it  paid.  If 
his  prosperity  and  welfare  were  interfered  with  Job  would 
abandon  his  piety  without  delay.  The  Satan  functions 
here  as  a  prosecuting  attorney,  with  a  strong  prejudice 
against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar;  compare  Zechariah.  He 
is  also  the  intermediary  agent  who  carries  the  direct  re¬ 
sponsibility  for  the  suffering  of  the  pious  and  thereby  lifts 
the  load  from  Yahweh’s  back.  Suffering  can  thus  be 
thought  of  as  the  work  of  the  Satan  and  not  be  charged  up 
against  God.  Job  underwent  the  test  of  the  loss  of  his 
prosperity  and  of  his  children  and  came  out  with  his  piety 
unscathed  (Job  1:13-22).  The  Satan  thereupon  insists 
that  the  test  was  not  thorough  enough  and  that  if  pushed 

IJob3i:38f.  This  passage  eludes  exact  interpretation;  see  the 
commentaries,  in  loc. 

2  Job  31:29,  30. 


268 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


further  Job’s  character  would  break  down;  but  Job 
undergoes  the  final  test  and  passes  with  a  grade  of  ioo 
per  cent  plus  (Job  2:1-10).  The  contribution  of  the 
Prologue  is  very  clear,  definite,  and  important.  The 
truly  pious  man  does  not  demand  rewards  as  the  pre¬ 
requisite  for  his  continuance  in  the  way  of  goodness. 
Piety  is  a  quality  of  the  inner  life  which  is  not  dependent 
upon  outer  circumstances.  Virtue  is  its  own  reward. 
A  commercialized  piety  would  not  stand  the  strain  of 
the  untoward  experiences  of  life. 

165.  The  Job  of  the  discussion  is  a  changed  man.  His 
equanimity  has  vanished.  He  challenges  the  worth- 
fulness  of  life  and  wishes  that  he  had  never  been  born. 
He  shocks  his  pious,  orthodox  friends  by  the  daring 
attacks  he  makes  upon  the  moral  order.  They  under¬ 
take  to  reason  with  him  and  to  restore  him  to  a  normal 
way  of  thinking.  They  are  perfectly  satisfied  with  the 
conventional  view  as  to  the  place  and  function  of  suffer¬ 
ing  in  life;  and  they  keep  on  reiterating  it,  despite  Job’s 
indignant  and  forceful  expostulations.  That  view  is 
that  suffering  is  the  punishment  for  sin  and  that  the 
pious  suffer  only  temporarily.  The  wicked  perish  pre¬ 
maturely,  but  the  pious  live  to  a  ripe  old  age.  Job,  there¬ 
fore,  has  no  warrant  for  his  complaint,  if  he  is  the 
righteous  man  he  seems  to  have  been.1  He  can  rest 
assured  that  he  will  not  be  cut  off  from  life  before  his 
time.  His  piety  is  his  guaranty  of  well-being.  This  is 
the  teaching  of  the  former  generations  of  wise  men  and 
ought  to  be  trusted.2 

Job,  though  accepting  this  as  the  right  theory  of  life, 
cites  the  facts  of  experience  to  show  that  the  theory  does 

1  Job  4:6-9;  5:1-6;  11:20;  15:20-35;  18:5.  2  Job  8:8-20. 


A  SAINT  UNDER  FIRE 


269 


not  operate  in  the  actual  everyday  world.  The  wicked 
flourish  and  prosper;  they  grow  richer  and  richer;  they 
pay  no  heed  to  God,  esteeming  it  useless  to  worship 
him;  and  they  die  an  easy  death,  not  suffering  months 
and  years  of  agony  as  Job  is  doing.  If  the  friends  would 
save  their  theory  by  the  claim  that  the  punishment  for 
sin  often  lights  upon  the  sinner’s  children,  Job  protests 
that  this  is  unfair,  and  that  the  sinner  should  suffer  for  his 
own  sin.1  Job,  therefore,  represents  the  newer  doctrine 
of  individual  responsibility  before  God  and  repudiates  the 
old  doctrine  of  family  solidarity.2 

166.  Traditional  views. — The  friends  can  but  admit 
that  suffering  does  befall  the  pious.  They  account  for 
this  disturbing  fact  in  two  ways.  They  declare  that  the 
sufferings  of  the  righteous  are  merely  temporary  and 
are  sent  upon  the  pious  for  purposes  of  a  disciplinary 
character.  They  are  to  correct  the  errors  of  the  pious 
and  lead  them  back  into  the  paths  of  righteousness.  If 
Job  will  but  make  acknowledgment  of  his  sins  and  repent, 
he  will  be  at  once  restored  to  the  divine  favor  and  be 
crowned  with  blessings  of  prosperity.  This  promise  is 
most  beautifully  phrased  by  Eliphaz: 

Behold,  happy  is  the  man  whom  God  correcteth; 

And  despise  thou  not  the  chastening  of  the  Almighty. 

For  he  maketh  sore,  and  bindeth  up; 

He  woundeth,  and  his  hands  heal. 

In  six  troubles  he  will  deliver  thee; 

And  in  seven  no  evil  will  touch  thee. 

In  famine  he  will  redeem  thee  from  death; 

And  in  war  from  the  power  of  the  sword. 

From  the  scourge  of  the  tongue  thou  shalt  be  hid; 

Neither  shalt  thou  be  afraid  of  desolation  when  it  cometh. 


1  Job  21 : 7-21. 


2  See  pp.  127  f.,  176. 


270 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


At  destruction  and  death  thou  shalt  laugh; 

And  of  the  beasts  of  the  earth  be  thou  not  afraid. 

For  thou  shalt  be  in  league  with  the  stones  of  the  field; 

And  the  beasts  of  the  field  shall  be  at  peace  with  thee, 

And  thou  shalt  know  that  thy  tent  is  in  peace; 

And  thou  shalt  visit  thy  homestead  and  shalt  miss  nothing. 
Thou  shalt  know  also  that  thy  seed  shall  be  great, 

And  thine  offspring  as  the  herbage  of  the  earth. 

Thou  shalt  come  to  thy  grave  in  firm  strength, 

As  a  shock  of  corn  cometh  in  in  its  season  [Job  5 : 17-26].1 

167.  A  second  line  of  defense  is  put  up  by  the  friends 
in  the  proposition  that  human  nature  as  such  is  sinful 
and  must  therefore  suffer  punishment.  Job  is  after  all 
only  a  man;  and  as  such  shares  the  faults  of  his  kind 
and  must  likewise  share  their  punitive  sorrows  and 
pains.  Eliphaz  puts  this  impressively  in  his  first  address 
where  he  represents  himself  as  having  learned  this  great 
truth  by  a  special,  direct  revelation  from  God: 

For  to  me  a  word  was  stealthily  conveyed, 

And  my  ear  received  a  whisper  thereof. 

In  meditations,  from  visions  of  the  night, 

When  deep  sleep  falls  upon  men, 

Terror  fell  upon  me  and  trembling, 

And  all  my  bones  were  made  to  fear. 

A  breeze  passed  over  my  face; 

The  hair  of  my  flesh  was  made  to  stand  on  end. 

It  stood  still — and  I  could  not  discern  its  appearance, 

A  form  was  before  mine  eyes; 

Silence — and  I  heard  a  voice: 

“Can  one  be  just  before  God, 

Or  can  a  man  be  pure  before  his  Maker  ? 

Behold,  he  puts  no  trust  in  his  servants; 

And  to  his  angels  he  ascribes  error. 

How  much  more  those  who  dwell  in  houses  of  clay, 

Whose  basis  is  in  the  dust! 


1  Cf.  Job  11:13-19;  22:21-30. 


A  SAINT  UNDER  FIRE 


271 


They  are  crushed  more  quickly  than  a  moth; 

Between  morning  and  evening  they  are  pulverized. 

Without  anyone  heeding, 

They  perish  forever. 

When  their  tent-cord  is  plucked  up, 

Do  they  not  die — and  that  without  wisdom  ?” 

[Job  4:12-21.] 

Such  a  being  as  man  is  “born  unto  trouble  even  as 
sparks  fly  upward”  (Job  5: 7).  Incidentally,  this  frailty 
and  sinfulness  of  man  are  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  he 
is  bom  of  woman!  This  prejudice  against  woman  is 
shared  by  both  sides  of  the  discussion.  Both  Eliphaz1 
and  Bildad2  give  expression  to  it,  and  Job  is  no  less 
emphatic  upon  the  subject.3 

Job  never  tires  of  confronting  the  theories  of  the 
friends  with  facts  drawn  from  his  own  observation  and 
experience.  He  valiantly  maintains  that  he  has  not  been 
guilty  of  any  such  gross  sin  as  his  sufferings  would  imply. 
He  is  suffering  without  due  cause.4  The  friends  cannot 
accept  Job’s  claims  without  giving  up  their  theology. 
Forced  to  choose  between  their  friend  and  their  theology, 
they  cling  to  their  theories  and  interpret  their  friend  in 
accordance  with  theory  rather  than  facts.  So  they 
boldly  charge  Job  with  being  guilty  of  glaring  crimes. 
The  sufferings  of  Job  are  their  only  evidence  for  these; 
but  they  are  aided  to  their  conclusion  by  the  bitterness 
of  spirit  that  has  characterized  so  much  of  Job’s  utter¬ 
ance.  Zophar,  the  bluntest  of  the  three  friends,  goes  so 
far  as  to  maintain  that  Job  has  not  suffered  to  the  full 
extent  of  his  sins;  he  deserves  to  suffer  even  more.5 

1  Job  15: 14-16.  2  Job  25:4.  3  Job  2:9,  10;  14:1. 

4  Job  6: 10,  30;  16:17;  23:10-12;  27:1-6;  29:12-17;  31:1-40. 

s  Job  11:6;  cf.  Bildad,  in  8:3-6;  and  Eliphaz,  in  22:5-9. 


272 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


168.  Job  indignantly  repudiates  these  charges ,  and, 
forced  by  his  theology,  throws  back  the  responsibility 
for  his  suffering  upon  God  himself,  whom  he  declares 
to  be  non-moral,  if  not  immoral.  God  is  attacking  him 
furiously.1  God  is  too  great  and  powerful  to  concern 
himself  with  the  details  of  human  life.2 3  He  disregards 
the  moral  interests  of  his  world: 


Though  I  be  righteous,  my  own  mouth  condemns  me; 

I  am  innocent,  but  he  has  proved  me  perverse; 

I  do  not  know  myself.  I  despise  my  life. 

It  is  one;  therefore,  I  say, 

Innocent  and  wicked  he  destroys. 

If  the  scourge  kills  suddenly, 

He  mocks  at  the  trial  of  the  pure. 

The  earth  is  given  into  the  hand  of  the  wicked; 

He  covers  the  faces  of  its  judges. 

If  it  is  not  he,  then  who  is  it  [Job  9:20-24]  ?* 

Under  conditions  like  these,  Job’s  thoughts  turn  to 
death  as  his  way  of  escape.  He  dwells  upon  the  rest 
and  peace  of  Sheol,  where  all  classes  of  men  are  equal 
and  all  cares  cease.4  He  protests  against  the  fact  that 
life  is  forced  upon  men  though  they  do  not  want  to  live.5 
Life  is  an  intolerable  burden,  ending  in  the  grave.6 
Death  ends  all.  Even  God  himself  cannot  recover  Job 
after  he  shall  have  died.7  Life  on  earth  is  brief;  and 
there  is  no  worthful  life  beyond  the  grave.8 

169.  Flashes  of  insight. — In  the  midst  of  all  this 
bitterness  and  gloom,  Job  sends  forth  flashes  of  insight 
that  compel  admiration.  He  steadfastly  and  repeatedly 


1  Job  6:4;  19:62.;  i9:2if. 

2  Job  9:1-19. 

3  Cf.  Job  10:3;  12:6. 

4  Job  3:11-19. 


s Job  3:20-26;  10:18-22. 

6  Job  7:1-10;  17:13-16. 

7  Job  7 : 21. 

8  Job  14: 1-22;  16:22. 


A  SAINT  UNDER  FIRE 


273 


refuses  to  stultify  himself  by  making  confession  of  sins 
of  which  he  has  no  consciousness.  He  knows  himself  to 
be  essentially  sound,  and  though  there  is  much  in  the 
world  that  he  declares  himself  unable  to  understand,  he 
clings  fast  to  the  fact  of  his  own  integrity.  Of  that  he 
is  sure.  He  knows  himself.  He  is  so  sure  of  this  that  he 
is  forced  to  the  further  assurance  that  God  himself  will 
in  due  time  be  compelled  to  recognize  his  innocence. 
Like  the  friends,  he  interprets  his  troubles  as  an  expres¬ 
sion  of  the  wrath  of  God;  but  he  looks  forward  to  a  time 
when  God’s  wrath  shall  be  past,  and  his  own  true  char¬ 
acter  be  recognized  by  his  God.  He  appeals  from  Philip 
drunk  to  Philip  sober.  Like  Mohammed,  he  realizes 
that  there  is  “no  appeal  from  God  except  to  God.” 

0  earth,  cover  not  my  blood; 

And  let  there  be  no  place  for  my  cry; 

Yet  now,  behold,  my  witness  is  in  the  heavens; 

And  he  who  vouches  for  me  is  on  high. 

My  friends  scorn  me; 

Unto  God  mine  eye  drops  tears  [Job  16:18-20]. 

He  has  a  deep  underlying  faith  in  the  justice  of  God. 
He  refuses  to  believe  that  God  can  or  will  endure  any 
specious  or  unfair  advocacy  of  his  own  cause;  God  insists 
upon  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth.1 
The  friends,  therefore,  by  shutting  their  eyes  to  facts, 
are  rendering  themselves  liable  to  the  wrath  of  God. 

He  himself  longs  for  an  opportunity  to  present  his 
case  to  God  that  he  may  obtain  a  full  vindication.2  The 
certainty  of  such  a  future  vindication  seems  to  come  to 
him  in  the  famous  passage,  19: 25ft.  Unfortunately, 
the  text  of  this  passage  is  so  imperfect  and  ambiguous 

'Job  13:7-12,  16.  2  J°b  23:3-12;  cf.  19:23  b 


274 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


that  it  is  scarcely  susceptible  of  translation  and  interpre¬ 
tation.  The  certain  elements  in  the  verse  are  two, 
viz.,  (i)  “I  know  my  vindicator  lives,”  and  (2)  “I  shall 
see  God.”  The  intervening  lines  elude  precise  defini¬ 
tion.  Job  repeats  the  assurance  that  God  is  on  his  side 
and  declares  that  he  himself  will  be  conscious  of  God’s 
vindication  of  him.  Whether  he  thinks  of  that  vindica¬ 
tion  as  coming  before  or  after  death  we  cannot  discover. 
If  the  expectation  of  vindication  looks  forward  to  its 
realization  in  a  life  after  death,  then  the  passage  can 
hardly  be  thought  of  as  having  been  an  original  element 
in  the  Book  of  Job.  It  is  a  later  addition  to  the  discus¬ 
sion  by  some  reader  or  copyist.  The  Book  of  Job 
nowhere  else  recognizes  a  worthful  existence  after  death. 
This  passage  therefore  would  be  foreign  to  the  thought 
of  the  book.  Indeed,  the  language  of  the  book  in  regard 
to  death  is  so  positively  against  the  hope  of  life  after 
death  that  the  presence  of  that  thought  on  Job’s  lips 
would  be  inexplicable.1  The  splendor  of  Job’s  position 
lies  in  the  fact  that  he  remains  true  to  himself  and  faith¬ 
ful  to  his  ideals  though  he  sees  no  solution  to  his  problems, 
either  in  this  life  or  in  another.  He  is  confident  that 
God  knows  him  and  knows  that  he  is  righteous,  and 
he  is  certain  that  at  some  time  in  the  future  he  will  have 
the  satisfaction  of  vindication  at  the  bar  of  God;  and 
with  that  he  must  be  content. 

170.  The  climax  of  the  Book  of  Job  is  reached  in  the 
appearance  of  Yahweh  upon  the  scene.  Here  the  author 

1  This  is  felt  to  such  an  extent  by  G.  B.  Gray,  ad  loc.,  that  he  declines 
to  recognize  a  full-fledged  hope  of  a  future  life  here,  but  sees  rather  an 
expectation  of  a  temporary  restoration  to  consciousness  of  sufficient 
length  only  to  permit  Job  to  see  his  vindication  at  the  bar  of  God’s 
judgment. 


A  SAINT  UNDER  FIRE 


275 


of  the  book  speaks  his  message.  The  vision  of  God 
grants  Job  the  interview  for  which  he  had  been  longing. 
But  both  Job  and  the  friends  meet  with  rebuke.  Job’s 
maintenance  of  his  integrity  against  the  insinuations  and 
accusations  of  the  friends  is  tacitly  approved.  Thereby 
the  friends  are  shown  to  have  been  wrong.  The  omnip¬ 
otence  and  omniscience  of  God  are  set  forth  in  majestic 
terms  and  it  is  unmistakably  shown  how  far  the  power 
and  wisdom  of  the  deity  transcend  the  comprehension 
of  man.  Thereby,  Job  is  shown  to  have  been  in  the 
wrong  when  he  was  so  foolish  and  impertinent  as  to 
make  charges  against  the  character  of  God.  All  this 
has  its  effect  upon  Job,  who  is  satisfied  by  the  vision 
of  God  and  made  profoundly  conscious  of  his  own  limita¬ 
tions.  The  contribution  of  the  Yahweh  speeches,  there¬ 
fore,  is  not  in  the  form  of  an  ethical  solution  of  the  prob¬ 
lem  of  suffering,  but  rather  in  the  inculcation  of  a  befitting 
religious  attitude  toward  the  problem.  The  point  of 
the  speech  is  that  Job  should  trust  God  even  though  he 
does  not  and  cannot  understand  all  the  workings  of  the 
physical  world,  let  alone  the  moral  universe. 

The  author  of  the  Book  of  Job  had  no  positive  theory 
to  present  or  expound.  He  recognized  the  insolubility 
of  the  problem  of  suffering.  His  only  purpose  was  to 
show  the  utter  inadequacy  of  the  current  or  orthodox 
view  as  to  the  cause  and  function  of  suffering.  He  used 
the  character,  Job,  to  utter  his  views  on  this  point. 
Through  the  discourses  of  Job  he  shattered  the  conven¬ 
tional  orthodoxy  as  to  suffering  and  lifted  an  intolerable 
burden  from  the  minds  of  many  sufferers  who  read  his 
message.  He  showed  them  that  the  suffering  soul  is 
not  necessarily  a  victim  of  the  wrath  of  God;  and  so 


276  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


freed  them  from  a  terrible  uneasiness  and  dread.  But 
notwithstanding  Job’s  splendid  stand  against  the  con¬ 
ventional  view  of  suffering,  that  view  continued  to  hold 
its  ground  with  the  common  man  and  is  regnant  over 
many  minds  even  yet. 

1 71.  The  speeches  of  Elihu. — The  original  Book  of 
Job  did  not  satisfy  everybody.  One  of  the  malcontents 
has  put  his  views  on  record  and  incorporated  them  into 
the  Book  of  Job  itself.  They  are  represented  in  the 
speeches  of  Elihu  (chaps.  32-37).  Elihu  is  introduced 
to  supplement  the  teachings  of  the  friends.  He  is 
essentially  in  sympathy  with  their  point  of  view,  but 
thinks  that  they  have  not  done  full  justice  to  it.  He 
therefore  makes  the  following  additional  suggestions.  In 
reply  to  Job’s  complaint  that  God  does  not  communicate 
with  men,  he  maintains  that  God  does  speak  to  men 
and  that  in  two  ways,  (1)  through  dreams,  and  (2) 
through  chastisements  which  God  sends  upon  men  for 
the  purpose  of  discipline,  that  they  may  be  trained  aright 
and  that  their  mounting  pride  may  be  kept  within 
bounds,  lest  they  dash  headlong  to  destruction.1  He 
likewise  argues  that  God  as  the  governor  of  the  world 
is  above  and  beyond*  the  criticism  of  mere  man.2  He 
also  points  out  that  God  has  nothing  to  gain  or  lose  by 
man’s  righteousness  or  unrighteousness  and  that  he  is 
therefore  not  moved  by  self-interest  in  his  dealings  with 
man.3  And  he  closes  his  address  with  the  proposition 
that  God  is  beyond  all  possibility  of  being  understood 
by  men,  even  in  his  creation  and  administration  of  the 
physical  universe.  His  whole  effort  is  to  save  the  char- 

1  Job  33:15-28.  2  Job  34:17  ft-  3  job  35: 1-8. 


A  SAINT  UNDER  FIRE 


277 


acter  of  God.  He  adds  nothing  to  the  solution  of  the 
ethical  problem. 

172.  The  limitations  of  the  discussion. — The  entire 
treatment  of  the  problem  of  suffering  in  the  Book  of 
Job  is  noteworthy  for  what  it  lacks,  and  not  only  for 
what  it  gives.  The  treatment  is  conspicuously  and 
exclusively  a  religious  one.  The  problem  is  conceived 
of  in  terms  of  religion  and  wrought  out  along  religious 
lines.  There  is  no  recognition  of  the  contribution  of 
suffering  to  life.  The  nearest  approach  to  this  is  the 
emphasis  laid  upon  the  repressive  restraint  that  suffer¬ 
ing  lays  upon  certain  tendencies  in  human  nature  which, 
if  developed  too  far,  would  bring  man  into  opposition  with 
God.  But  that  suffering  should  function  in  a  positive 
way  toward  the  enrichment  and  deepening  of  character  is 
a  thought  that  never  enters  the  mind  of  the  friends, 
Elihu,  or  Job.  The  function  of  pain  as  a  danger  signal; 
the  rise  of  sympathy  for  our  fellows  because  of  our  own 
similar  experiences  making  us  appreciative  of  the  meaning 
of  certain  aspects  of  life;  the  driving  power  of  suffering 
in  the  creation  of  dissatisfaction  with  existing  conditions, 
and  a  hunger  for  improvement  in  the  standards  of  life, 
all  of  which  eventuate  in  the  making  of  a  better  world; 
the  testing  and  purifying  of  human  love  as  it  goes  through 
the  fire  of  suffering  and  comes  out  spiritualized  and 
ethicized  to  a  degree  unknown  apart  from  suffering;  these 
are  aspects  of  the  ethical  and  social  side  of  the  problem 
that  the  Book  of  Job  left  for  later  generations  to  discover. 


CHAPTER  XIV 


THE  MEANING  OF  LIFE  AND  THE 
LIGHT  OF  LOVE 

173.  Ecclesiastes  and  Song  of  Songs. — In  this  chapter 
we  bring  together,  for  convenience’s  sake,  two  books 
which  are  as  widely  separated  one  from  the  other  in 
spirit  and  method  as  two  books  could  well  be.  The 
books  in  question  are  Ecclesiastes  and  the  Song  of  Songs. 
They  are  alike  only  in  the  fact  that  they  both  lie  outside 
the  circles  of  thought  within  which  the  rest  of  the  Old 
Testament  moves.  Without  them  the  Old  Testament 
would  be  a  narrower  and  a  poorer  book. 

174.  The  Book  of  Ecclesiastes. — Like  most  of  the  Old 
Testament  books  Ecclesiastes  is  a  composite  work. 
It  contains  at  least  three  main  strata.  The  original 
writer,  whom  we  may  call  Qoheleth,  using  the  Hebrew 
title  of  the  book,  has  been  called  an  agnostic,  a  skeptic, 
a  “ gentle  cynic,”  and  the  like,  terms  indicative  of  the 
general  character  of  his  contribution.  His  work  has 
been  supplemented  and  corrected  by  an  orthodox  editor 
who  sought  to  furnish  an  antidote  for  the  heresy  so 
powerfully  presented  by  Qoheleth.  This  orthodox  con¬ 
tribution  is  responsible  for  the  admittance  of  Qoheleth 
into  the  Sacred  Canon  and  is  therefore  deserving  of 
deep  gratitude  from  all  students.  But  we  shall  find 
nothing  new  for  our  consideration  in  this  element  in 
the  book  and  shall  therefore  confine  our  attention  to 
Qoheleth  proper.  The  third  stratum  of  Ecclesiastes 
consists  of  certain  harmless  platitudes  reflecting  the 

278 


THE  MEANING  OF  LIFE 


279 


mind  of  the  average  sage,  which  we  can  well  afford  to 
neglect.1 

175.  The  times  of  Qoheleth. — Qoheleth  did  his  work 
in  the  early  part  of  the  Greek  period  of  Jewish  history. 
This  began  formally  with  Alexander’s  conquest  of  the 
oriental  world.  But  the  Orient  had  been  in  close  con¬ 
tact  with  the  Hellenic  mind  for  some  time  prior  to  that 
event;  and  Alexander’s  conquest  was  as  much  a  conquest 
of  mind  as  one  of  arms.  Alexander  sought  not  merely 
to  subdue  the  oriental  world  on  the  field  of  battle,  but 
also  to  Hellenize  the  Orient.  He  gave  great  impetus  to 
the  Hellenizing  movement  already  under  way.  Greek 
cities  were  founded  on  strategic  sites  as  centers  of  culture, 
whence  Greek  influences  might  go  out  to  permeate  the 
surrounding  regions.  A  great  library  grew  up  in  Alex¬ 
andria  where  the  literary  treasures  of  both  Occident  and 
Orient  were  gathered  together  and  made  accessible  to 
students.  Greek  merchants  and  Greek  mercenaries 
carried  the  goods,  the  arts,  the  crafts,  the  thoughts, 
and  the  ideals  of  Greece  throughout  the  oriental  world. 

176.  Qohelettis  political  background  was  Greek.  His 
economic  world  was  in  Greek  hands.  His  philosophic 
masters  were  Greeks.  His  religion  could  not  wholly 
escape  the  influence  of  the  dominant  people  who  deter¬ 
mined  the  conditions  amid  which  it  functioned.  That 
Qoheleth’s  mind  was  not  untouched  by  Greek  thought  is 
proved  from  the  fact  that  he  has  been  variously  inter¬ 
preted  as  a  disciple  of  the  Epicureans,2  a  follower  of 

IThe  best  English  studies  of  Ecclesiastes  are:  A.  H.  McNeile, 
Introduction  to  Ecclesiastes  (1904);  George  A.  Barton,  A  Critical  Exegetical 
Commentary  on  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  (1908);  Morris  Jastrow,  A  Gentle 
Cynic  (1919). 

2  So  Paul  Haupt,  The  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  (1905). 


28o 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  Stoics,1  and  a  pupil  of  Heraclides.2  But  no  one  of 
these  views  has  succeeded  in  winning  general  approval. 
The  characteristics  of  Qoheleth  that  have  led  to  the 
formulation  of  such  theories  seem  better  accounted  for 
by  a  more  general  hypothesis.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
make  Qoheleth  an  exponent  of  any  particular  type  of 
Greek  philosophy.  It  is  more  probable  that  the  Greek 
spirit  which  was  shed  abroad  among  all  men  of  culture 
was  shared  by  him  and  affected  his  mode  of  thought 
and  utterance.  The  Greek  philosophical  and  speculative 
attitude  of  mind  was  a  common  characteristic  of  the 
intellectual  world  at  large.  It  dominated  the  thinking 
of  the  day.  It  was  a  part  of  the  commonly  accepted 
Weltanschauung  of  the  educated  world.  It  was  like 
the  so-called  scientific  spirit  of  the  present  day,  which 
more  or  less  directly  influences  all  intellectual  effort. 
Many  who  are  influenced  by  it  know  practically  nothing 
of  science  in  the  strict  sense.  Just  as  many  a  writer 
today  uses  the  method  and  terms  of  the  science  of  evolu¬ 
tion,  though  often  knowing  next  to  nothing  about 

evolution  itself,  so  Qoheleth  ordered  his  discussion  of 

\ 

the  problem  of  the  worthfulness  of  life  by  Greek  canons 
though  not  necessarily  knowing  Greek  philosophy  at 
first  hand.  A  new  attitude  of  mind  was  abroad  in  the 
oriental  world  and  Qoheleth  could  not  escape  it.  Indeed 
it  seems  to  have  been  congenial  to  him,  so  that  he  easily 
shook  off  the  old  dogmatic  shackles  of  his  Semitic  and 
Jewish  teachers  and  launched  out  into  the  freedom  of 
inquiry  and  investigation  which  was  so  characteristic 
of  the  Greek  mind. 

1  T.  Tyler,  Ecclesiastes  (2d  ed.,  1899);  Plumptre,  The  Book  of  Eccle¬ 
siastes  (Cambridge  Bible,  1892). 

2  Pfleiderer,  Die  Philosophic  des  Heraklit  von  Ephesus  (1886) 


THE  MEANING  OF  LIFE 


281 


177.  The  question  that  Qoheleth  set  himself  to  answer 
was,  Is  life  worth  living  ?  He  approached  this  problem 
by  many  avenues,  all  of  which  led  him  out  on  to  the 
same  bare  and  bleak  plateau.  His  course  of  thought 
may  be  briefly  traced  and  summarized  here,  after  which 
its  merits  and  limitations  may  be  indicated. 

178.  Qoheleth’s  opinions. — a)  Qoheleth  declares  that 
the  world  is  a  cycle  in  ceaseless  movement.  Everything 
ends  where  it  began.  There  is  never  anything  new. 
What  seems  new  is  but  the  old  coming  back  into  human 
experience  again.  Men  too,  like  everything  else,  come 
and  go  and  are  soon  forgotten.  It  has  always  been  so; 
and  it  always  will  be  so  (Eccles.  1:3-11). 

h)  I  have  tried,  says  Qoheleth,  all  aspects  of  life,  and 
have  come  to  the  same  conclusion  for  all:  there  is  no 
substantial  or  permanent  gain  within  the  reach  of  man.  I 
became  a  student  of  life  in  its  multiform  varieties,  and 
I  saw  that  human  effort  at  betterment  was  futile.  Even 
my  own  studies  were  of  no  value.  I  tried  the  many 
forms  of  amusement  and  found  them  a  hollow  mockery. 
I  gave  myself  to  the  task  of  building  up  a  great  estate, 
with  every  convenience  and  luxury  that  great  wealth 
could  furnish.  I  did  not  forsake  my  wisdom  while 
following  these  interests;  and  I  enjoyed  myself  as  I 
went  along;  but  there  was  no  substantial  or  permanently 
satisfying  result  to  all  my  labor  (Eccles.  1 : 12 — 2 :  n). 

c)  I  surveyed  the  whole  area  of  human  experience, 
and  what  did  I  find  ?  That  wisdom  excels  folly  as  light 
does  darkness,  I  grant  you;  but  wise  and  foolish  come  to 
the  same  end  and  are  alike  forgotten.  Therefore  I  have 
come  to  hate  life.  Of  what  use  is  all  man’s  labor? 
He  cannot  take  it  with  him;  and  he  has  no  assurance 


282 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


that  he  will  leave  it  in  wise  hands.  To  what  purpose 
does  a  man  spend  weary  days  and  anxious  nights  ?  To 
leave  his  substance  to  a  man  who  never  lifted  his  hand 
to  honest  labor  ?  As  I  see  life,  the  thing  to  do  is  to  eat 
and  drink  and  enjoy  one’s  self  as  one  goes  along,  getting 
pleasure  from  the  toil  itself  and  thanking  God  for  the 
opportunity  to  labor  (Eccles.  2:12-25). 

d)  Everything  in  the  order  of  nature  is  fixed  and  pre¬ 
determined.  Man  cannot  change  a  single  iota;  his  efforts 
are  utterly  futile.  The  arrangements  of  the  universe 
are  admirable;  but  God  has  implanted  in  the  mind  of 
man  a  conception  of  eternity,  so  that  he  can  never  satisfy 
himself  with  the  mere  present.  Yet  he  lacks  the  capacity 
to  see  beyond  the  present  and  survey  the  whole  program 
of  God  from  start  to  finish.  So  man  must  content 
himself  with  his  food  and  drink  and  the  joy  of  his  work, 
all  of  which  is  the  gift  of  God.  But  God’s  work  is 
finished;  he  has  left  nothing  for  man  to  do;  past,  present, 
and  future  are  all  wrought  out  in  the  mind  of  God;  it  is 
a  predetermined  universe  (Eccles.  3 : 1-15). 

e)  There  is  no  moral  order  in  human  society.  Things 
are  topsy-turvy.  As  I  have  pondered  upon  this,  I  have 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  God’s  way  of  revealing 
to  men  their  true  nature — they  are  no  better  than  brutes. 
Man  and  beast  alike  die;  all  alike  return  to  the  dust; 
and  who  shall  say  whether  or  not  the  spirit  of  man  goes 
upward  and  the  spirit  of  the  beast  downward  ?  So  my 
conviction  is  that  man  should  rejoice  in  his  daily  toil, 
for  he  will  never  know  what  follows  upon  his  death. 
And  when  one  considers  the  problem  of  oppression  in 
society  and  the  sorrow  and  pain  resulting  from  it,  the 
dead  are  to  be  congratulated  that  they  are  dead;  and 


THE  MEANING  OF  LIFE 


283 


they  would  have  been  better  off  still  if  they  had  never 
been  born.  The  skilful  and  industrious  man  does  but 
arouse  the  envy  of  his  fellows;  of  what  value  then  is  his 
toil  ?  Better  to  be  content  with  but  a  little.  Especially 
is  this  true  of  the  solitary  man,  whose  hard-earned  wealth 
does  him  no  good;  nor  has  he  anyone  upon  whom  to 
bestow  it.  The  recent  changes  in  political  affairs  strik¬ 
ingly  illustrate  my  proposition  that  there  is  nothing  of 
permanent  value.  One  king  went  and  another  came; 
and  though  the  new  king  is  wise  and  the  old  one  was  a 
fool,  yet  both  in  turn  will  be  alike  forgotten  by  the 
masses  (Eccles.  4:1-16). 

/)  There  is  no  genuine  value  in  wealth.  The  only 
satisfaction  the  rich  man  has  in  his  riches  is  in  the  con¬ 
sciousness  that  he  possesses  them.  They  are  a  constant 
worry  to  him  and  rob  him  of  his  sleep.  He  is  never  sure 
of  retaining  his  possession  of  them.  His  children  may 
squander  his  wealth  for  him.  In  any  case,  he  must  leave 
it  behind  at  death.  Of  what  use,  then,  was  it  that  he 
should  have  worn  himself  out  in  obtaining  his  wealth  ? 
The  only  sensible  course  is  to  eat,  drink  and  be  merry 
while  life  lasts.  If  you  have  had  riches  and  enjoyed  the 
use  of  them,  thank  God.  Enjoy  yourself  as  you  go  along 
and  life  will  not  be  an  altogether  intolerable  burden. 
The  commonly  accepted  valuations  of  life  are  all  wrong. 
Of  what  value  are  riches,  no  matter  how  great,  if  their 
owner  cannot  make  use  of  them,  but  must  see  others  use 
them?  Or  if  a  man  have  a  hundred  children  and  live 
to  a  ripe  old  age,  but  gets  no  satisfaction  while  he  lives 
and  is  deprived  of  burial  when  he  dies,  it  would  have 
been  better  for  him  to  have  been  born  dead.  For  then 
he  would  have  escaped  all  worry.  If  a  man  should  live 


284  the  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


two  thousand  years  and  fail  to  enjoy  himself  while  he 
was  living,  of  what  value  would  it  be?  Would  he  not 
go  at  last  to  the  same  place  as  other  people?  Or,  in 
what  way  is  a  wise  man  any  better  off  than  a  fool  ? 
Man’s  career  is  predetermined  for  him  by  God  and 
cannot  be  changed.  Nobody  can  tell  what  is  best  for 
a  man  while  he  lives,  nor  what  will  happen  after  he  dies 
(Eccles.  5:7-19;  6:1-6,  8,  10-12). 

g )  The  sooner  one  dies  the  better ,  and  mourning  is 
preferable  to  mirth.  God’s  work  is  fixed  and  unchange¬ 
able,  no  matter  what  man  may  do.  Man  must  adjust 
himself  to  changes  of  fortune  and  realize  that  God  does 
not  intend  to  permit  any  knowledge  of  the  future.  The 
righteous  often  perish  notwithstanding  their  righteous¬ 
ness  and  sinners  live  out  their  days  in  sin.  Be  not  over- 
righteous  nor  over-wise,  nor  over-wicked,  nor  foolish 
unless  you  desire  a  speedy  end.  Let  moderation  in  all 
things  be  your  policy.  There  are  none  wholly  without 
sin.  Man  cannot  attain  wisdom;  amid  all  my  searching, 
I  have  found  only  one  certainty,  viz.,  that  you  may 
come  across  one  good  and  wise  man  in  a  thousand,  but 
not  one  woman  (Eccles.  7:1-3,  13-20,  23-28). 

h)  The  misery  of  all  miseries  for  man  is  that  he  can 
know  nothing  of  the  future.  He  does  not  even  know 
the  length  of  his  life,  nor  can  he  in  any  way  defer  the 
day  of  his  death.  No  amount  of  wickedness  and  no 
formal  piety  will  avail  to  shield  a  man  from  death.  Not 
only  so,  but  the  righteous  often  receive  the  reward 
properly  due  the  wicked;  and  vice  versa.  I  therefore 
deem  it  best  that  man  should  eat,  drink  and  be  merry 
as  he  goes  along  life’s  way,  taking  it  all  as  the  gift  of 
God  (Eccles.  8:66-10,  14,  15). 


THE  MEANING  OF  LIFE 


285 


i)  I  have  discovered  life  to  be  a  riddle  that  no  man  can 
solve ,  no  matter  how  hard  he  try.  Men  are  all  alike  in 
the  hands  of  God  and  none  knows  whether  God  will 
treat  him  kindly  or  cruelly.  All  share  the  same  final 
fate  and  no  moral  discrimination  is  ever  exercised.  The 
wicked  do  indeed  meet  death;  and  after  all,  life  is  better 
than  death;  for  the  dead  know  nothing,  while  the  living 
at  least  know  that  they  will  die.  All  virtues  and  vices 
alike  come  to  an  end  in  the  grave.  Therefore,  eat  and 
drink  with  a  glad  heart  and  enjoy  life  with  your  beloved 
wife  as  long  as  you  may.  That  is  your  portion  in  life. 
Live  strenuously  while  you  have  the  chance,  for  there  is 
nothing  to  be  done  in  Sheol  (Eccles.  8: 16 — 9:7,  10). 

j)  Men  are  victims  of  chance  and  circumstance.  Moral 
desert  plays  no  part  in  the  determination  of  a  man’s 
lot.  I  saw  this  illustrated  in  the  case  of  a  small  town 
that  was  besieged.  A  poor  wise  man  could  have  saved 
the  town,  but  men  paid  him  no  heed.  So  I  observed 
that  wisdom  is  better  than  might,  even  though  a  poor 
man’s  wisdom  be  not  appreciated.  Human  society  is 
upside  down;  slaves  ride  and  princes  walk.  Happy  is 
the  land  that  has  a  mature  and  wise  king  and  sober 
counselors.  It  is  not  safe  to  curse  the  mighty  even  in 
secret;  for  it  is  likely  to  be  revealed  and  to  cause  trouble. 
A  man’s  investments  should  be  widely  distributed;  for 
one  never  knows  what  will  happen;  and  some  of  them 
will  probably  prosper.  No  man  knows  the  plans  of 
God.  We  are  all  perfectly  helpless  in  this  regard. 
Nevertheless,  this  inevitable  uncertainty  must  not  be 
allowed  to  paralyze  our  efforts  and  the  tasks  of  life  must 
be  faced  bravely  and  philosophically;  something  is 
likely  to  succeed.  It  is  good  to  be  alive;  and  though  we 


286 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


live  long,  we  may  be  glad  all  the  way.  But  let  us  not 
forget  the  innumerable  days  of  darkness  (Eccles.  9:11- 
16;  10:4-7,16-20;  11 : 1-8). 

k)  The  proper  procedure  for  a  young  man  is  that  he 
should  enjoy  life  while  he  is  young ,  putting  away  all 
sorrow  and  trouble;  for  he  will  never  be  young  again. 
Old  age  will  come  upon  him  with  its  blunting  of  the 
senses  and  crippling  of  the  faculties.  This  in  turn  will 
lead  to  death.  Then  his  flesh  goes  back  to  the  earth  as 
it  was  and  his  spirit  shall  return  to  God  who  gave  it 
(Eccles.  11:9,  10;  12:2-7). 

179.  Qoheleth’’ s  challenge. — Many  of  Qoheleth’s  obser¬ 
vations  and  conclusions  challenge  commonly  accepted 
views;  for  example,  his  harsh  judgment  of  human 
nature  in  general  and  of  women  in  particular;  his 
utterly  utilitarian  and  hedonistic  attitude  toward  the 
values  of  life;  and  the  shrewd  and  calculating  spirit 
with  which  he  approaches  the  whole  question  of  living. 
He  represents  practicality  at  its  worst.  On  the  other 
hand,  Qoheleth  serves  a  useful  purpose  in  the  Canon  of 
Scripture.  He  stands  for  the  right  to  investigate  the 
deepest  and  most  sacred  problems  of  life.  He  holds  that 
nothing  is  above  criticism,  that  everything  must  show 
cause  for  its  existence  and  be  able  to  defend  itself  upon 
its  merits.  He  is  of  great  value,  too,  as  a  reminder  of 
the  necessity  of  reckoning  with  the  hard  facts  of  life. 
He  serves  as  a  check  upon  airy  speculation  and  wild¬ 
eyed  idealism.  He  insists  upon  keeping  his  feet  upon 
the  ground.  He  stresses  the  necessity  of  staying  close 
to  reality. 

180.  Qoheleth's  contribution. — He  is  on  the  right 
track,  likewise,  in  that  he  insists  upon  the  need  of  an 


THE  MEANING  OF  LIFE 


287 


ultimate  value  for  life.  He  can  see  none;  but  this  to 
him  is  the  great  tragedy  of  living.  Are  we  getting  any¬ 
where  ?  Is  there  any  goal  toward  which  our  faces  are 
set  ?  Is  mankind  making  any  progress  ?  Are  we 
achieving  any  permanent  values  ?  Is  the  individual  life 
worth  a  candle  ?  Do  we  make  any  contribution  to  the 
enrichment  of  the  world  ?  To  all  such  questions 
Qoheleth  gives  a  negative  answer.  But  he  rendered  a 
great  service  in  raising  them.  He  felt  that  such  goals 
ought  to  be,  and  it  is  a  great  grief  to  him  that  so  far  as 
he  can  see  they  are  not.  He  has  no  clearly  formulated 
standard  of  value  for  human  effort;  but  by  implication, 
it  would  seem  that  he  would  demand  for  the  individual 
some  permanent  impress  for  betterment  upon  the  course 
of  human  life,  so  that  man  might  not  pass  as  the  brute 
into  an  endless  oblivion.  Perhaps,  too,  he  longed  for  a 
perpetuation  of  personality  in  a  life  beyond  the  grave; 
but  of  this  he  had  no  hope. 

18 1.  Qohelettis  outlook  upon  life  is  anything  but 
inspiring.  His  general  approach  to  the  program  of 
life  is  oriented  by  the  conviction  that  life  is  lacking  in 
the  reach  and  outlook  that  would  make  it  really  worth 
while;  but  that  even  so,  the  thing  to  do  is  to  make  the 
best  of  a  bad  situation.  Your  sphere  of  influence  and 
freedom  is  limited;  but  within  those  limitations,  obtain 
what  joy  is  available  as  you  go  along.  But  the  limita¬ 
tions  are  not  to  any  extent  as  oppressive  as  Qoheleth 
makes  them  out  to  be.  Qoheleth  thinks  of  man  as  a 
mere  puppet  upon  the  stage  of  a  predetermined  universe. 
Man  has  no  freedom;  he  is  utterly  bound  on  a  revolving 
wheel  of  circumstances.  Such  an  interpretation  of  life 
involves  complete  paralysis  of  all  aspiration,  ambition, 


288 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


and  initiative  in  the  field  of  ethics.  It  takes  the  snap 
out  of  life.  Fortunately,  such  a  view  of  life  is  not  in 
accord  with  the  facts  of  consciousness.  We  are  all  aware 
that  it  is  in  our  power  to  choose  our  own  course  of  action, 
that  in  any  given  situation  we  might  have  done  differ¬ 
ently,  if  we  had  so  desired.  Nothing  is  more  clear  to 
consciousness  than  this  sense  of  inner  freedom;  and  it  is 
one  of  the  most  precious  possessions  of  personality. 

182 .  Another  deject  in  Qoheleth’s  theory  is  that  he  has 
no  historical  perspective.  His  claim  that  there  is  nothing 
new  in  human  experience,  that  man  does  not  affect  the 
course  of  history  and  the  progress  of  civilization  is  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  facts  of  history.  The  world  has 
grown  better  as  it  has  grown  older.  Man  has  changed 
the  environment  of  his  life  for  good.  The  story  of  the 
centuries  is  a  tale  of  progress  and  of  continual  change, 
and  the  greater  part  of  this  change  and  progress  has  been 
brought  about  directly  and  immediately  by  the  efforts  of 
men  and  women.  The  history  of  the  world  is  by  no 
means  a  record  of  constantly  recurring  and  forever 
unvarying  phenomena  such  as  would  discourage  all 
endeavor  at  improvement;  it  is  rather  a  record  of 
repeated  endeavor  on  the  part  of  man  to  better  his 
condition  and  of  marvelous  success  in  so  doing;  so  that 
a  knowledge  of  the  achievements  of  man  becomes  a 
great  stimulus  toward  a  perpetuation  of  the  same  kind 
of  endeavor. 

183.  Lack  of  social  interest. — In  one  more  important 
ethical  aspect  Qoheleth’s  interpretation  of  life  is  lacking; 
and  that  is  in  the  total  absence  of  any  social  outlook 
upon  life.  He  is  purely  individualistic  in  all  his  inter¬ 
ests.  He  does  not  relate  himself  in  any  way  to  the  social 


THE  MEANING  OF  LIFE 


289 


order;  he  is  an  unrelated  individual.  He  manifests  no 
altruistic  elements;  he  makes  no  gestures  of  co-operation 
with  his  fellows.  He  has  no  place  in  the  thought  and 
action  of  the  individual  for  the  welfare  and  progress  of 
his  fellows.  He  has  no  conception  of  himself  as  a  part 
of  an  ongoing  stream  of  humanity  which  he  may  broaden 
and  deepen  by  the  contribution  of  his  own  personal 
endeavor.  He  thinks  of  himself  simply  as  a  helpless 
atom  in  a  constantly  revolving  flux  which  carries  him 
along  and  takes  him  nowhere,  always  coming  back  to  the 
place  whence  it  started.  The  conception  of  social  prog¬ 
ress  apparently  was  foreign  to  his  mind.  He  is  a 
representative  of  individualism  gone  to  seed.  With  all 
of  his  attention  and  energy  focused  upon  himself,  the 
fountains  of  his  life-energy  are  stopped  up;  they  lack 
all  social  outflow  and  he  becomes  a  stagnant  pool.  This 
is  one  of  the  most  conspicuously  non- Jewish  aspects  of 
Qoheleth’s  teaching;  for  the  Jew  was  essentially  socially 
minded.  He  lived  not  only  for  himself  but  also  for 
Jewry  and  its  glory. 

184.  The  message  of  Canticles. — As  an  antidote  to 
Qoheleth’s  pessimism  with  reference  to  woman,  we  sub¬ 
join  here  a  brief  summary  of  the  message  of  the  Song  of 
Songs.  This  book  has  a  long  and  varied  history  of 
interpretation.1  The  oldest  Christian  view  was  that 
the  book  was  an  allegory,  setting  forth  the  love  of  Christ 
for  his  church.  More  recently  it  was  held  that  the 
Song  was  a  drama  setting  forth  the  story  of  the  love  of 
a  man  for  a  woman.  Today  the  growing  tendency  is 

1  The  best  English  commentaries  on  the  Song  of  Songs  are :  Morris 
Jastrow,  The  Song  of  Songs  (1921);  Andrew  Harper,  The  Song  of  Solomon 
(Cambridge  Bible,  1902). 


290 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


to  regard  it  as  a  collection  of  love  lyrics  used  at  weddings. 
But  a  new  and  attractive  interpretation  has  just  been 
offered  which  would  make  it  a  body  of  liturgical  poetry 
that  had  its  origin  in  the  worship  of  Tammuz,  a  worship 
which  celebrated  the  marriage  of  the  sun-god  to  the  god¬ 
dess  of  fertility,  from  which  union  results  all  the  luxuriant 
life  of  budding  nature  in  the  spring.1  The  original 
Tammuz  character  was  in  due  time  eliminated  and  the 
Song  came  to  be  used  in  connection  with  spring  celebra¬ 
tions  as  a  part  of  the  worship  of  Yah  well. 

185.  The  value  of  Canticles. — Whatever  may  have 
been  the  original  or  final  function  of  the  Song,  it  is  clear 
that  it  is  a  bit  of  rich  lyric  poetry  that  came  right  out 
of  the  heart  of  the  masses  in  Jewry.  Its  central  theme 
is  love,  and  that  the  love  between  man  and  woman.  It 
sounds  somewhat  sensuous,  if  not  sensual,  in  our  ears; 
but  those  who  find  in  it  only  an  orgy  of  erotic  passion 
are  blind  to  the  beauty  of  its  naive  and  unconvention¬ 
alized  emotion.  The  Song  reflects  the  force  and  passion 
of  genuine  love.  It  is  a  bright  light  amid  the  prevailing 
darkness  of  the  Old  Testament  attitude  toward  woman. 
Elsewhere  she  is  altogether  too  much  the  plaything, 
possession,  and  tool  of  man.  Here  she  appears  as  a 
person  in  her  own  right.  Here  she  is,  at  least,  man’s 
equal,  not  his  slave.  The  relation  between  the  sexes  is 
upon  a  basis  of  equality  of  worth.  The  love  between 
man  and  woman  is  not  conceived  of  as  a  mere  fleeting 
passion;  it  is  rather  a  permanent  and  invincible  attitude 
of  mind  and  heart.  The  climax  of  the  description  of 

1  So  T.  J.  Meek,  “Canticles  and  the  Tammuz  Cult,”  American 
Journal  of  Semitic  Languages  and  Literatures ,  XXXIX  (1922),  1-14. 


THE  MEANING  OF  LIFE 


291 


the  power  of  love  in  chapter  8:6,  7,  is  unsurpassed  and 
perhaps,  unsurpassable  in  literature: 

For  strong  as  death  is  love, 

Unchangeable  as  Sheol  is  [its]  passion; 

Its  flames  are  flames  of  fire, 

A  devouring  fire. 

Many  waters  cannot  quench  love, 

Even  rivers  cannot  sweep  it  away. 

If  a  man  would  give  all  the  wealth  of  his  house  for  love, 

They  would  utterly  despise  him. 


CHAPTER  XV 


THE  MORAL  STANDARDS  OF  LEGALISM 

1 86.  Priestly  sources. — We  gather  together  in  this 
chapter  the  materials  that  show  the  moral  standards  of 
the  priestly  school  of  editors  and  writers.  Their  literary 
products  are  represented  by  the  P  document  in  the 
Hexateuch,  the  Books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  the 
Books  of  Chronicles.  Their  work  was  done  pretty  well 
along  in  the  fourth  century  b.c.  It  will  be  recognized 
in  advance  that  it  is  the  nature  of  the  priestly  mind  to 
be  conservative  and  cling  to  the  past.  It  will  also  be 
granted  that  the  interest  of  the  priestly  mind  is  in  ritual 
and  tradition  rather  than  in  ethics.  The  prophet  was 
the  great  protagonist  of  the  ethical  and  he  not  infre¬ 
quently  found  the  priest  in  opposition  to  him,  fighting 
for  his  ancient  customs,  institutions,  and  opinions.  So 
we  may  not  expect  to  find  anything  here  but  the  tra¬ 
ditional  and  orthodox  note  in  matters  relating  to 
morals. 

187.  Characteristics  of  the  priestly  sources. — What  we 
have  in  these  documents  is  a  re-writing  of  the  old  tradi¬ 
tions,  customs,  and  laws.  The  priestly  scribes  took  the 
familiar  materials  that  had  come  down  from  the  past 
and  got  them  out  in  new  and  revised  editions.  This  is 
plentifully  proven  and  illustrated  by  a  comparison  of 
the  Books  of  Kings,  for  example,  with  the  Books  of 
Chronicles.  Such  a  comparison  reveals  not  only  the 
fact  that  Chronicles  is  but  a  revision  of  the  history  as  it 
appears  in  Kings,  but  also  the  spirit,  point  of  view,  and 


292 


MORAL  STANDARDS  OF  LEGALISM 


293 


purpose  of  that  work  of  revision.  It  is  a  reinterpreta¬ 
tion  of  the  past  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  Chronicler’s 
present,  made  for  the  purpose  of  forcefully  illustrating 
by  means  of  the  past  the  importance  of  faithful  and 
strict  adherence  to  the  ritual  and  principles  held  to  be 
indispensable  by  the  Chronicler  and  his  priestly  con¬ 
temporaries.  Their  interests  and  hope  did  not  move  in 
the  field  of  the  moral,  but  in  that  of  the  ceremonial  and 
legal.  They  were  content  to  pass  on  the  accepted  moral 
standards  of  their  time  without  enrichment.  Their  con¬ 
tribution  was  made  along  other  lines. 

188.  The  old  uncomplimentary  estimate  of  woman  is 
found  in  these  writers  in  full  force.  They  record  without 
protest  or  criticism  the  fact  that  polygamy  was  practiced 
in  ancient  Israel  by  its  leading  men.  Abraham,  David, 
Rehoboam,  Abijah,  Joash,  and  many  others  had  two  or 
more  wives  and  yet  come  in  for  no  rebuke.1  This  silence 
certainly  implies  approval,  for  the  Chronicler  is  not  slow 
to  express  disapproval  when  he  is  so  minded.  Natu¬ 
rally  the  estimate  of  woman  was  low  and  the  restrictions 
placed  upon  her  were  severe.  The  mother  of  a  girl  was 
unclean  after  her  daughter’s  birth  twice  as  long  as  the 
mother  of  a  boy  and  was  likewise  debarred  from  entering 
the  sanctuary  for  twice  as  long  a  period  (Lev.  1 2 : 2-5) . 
A  woman’s  market  value  was  only  a  little  more  than  one- 
half  that  of  a  man  (Lev.  27 : 1-7).  In  the  ordeal  imposed 
upon  complaint  of  a  jealous  husband  the  burden  of  taking 
the  nasty  dose  is  upon  the  suspected  woman  even  though 
she  be  innocent  (Num.  5:16-31).  Apparently,  she  is 
presumed  to  be  guilty  until  “proved”  innocent!  A 

JI  Chron.  1:32;  2:18,  26,  48;  3:1-3,  5-9;  4:5;  7H,  14;  8:8; 
II  Chron.  11:21;  13:21;  24:3;  Gen.  16:1a;  26:34!.;  28: 8  f.;  36:1-5. 


294 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


woman’s  vow  is  void  unless  approved  by  her  husband 
or,  if  unmarried,  her  father.  A  widow  may  make  a 
vow  in  her  own  right  (Num.  30: 1-16).  No  daughter  may 
marry  outside  of  her  own  tribe,  because  by  so  doing  the 
inheritance  of  her  tribe  might  be  diminished  (Num. 
36:1-3).  Such  procedure  takes  no  account  of  the 
woman’s  personality  whatsoever.  That  is  of  no  impor¬ 
tance  as  compared  with  property  interests. 

189.  Jews  are  not  under  any  obligation  to  foreigners. — 
The  Jew  is  immeasurably  superior  to  them  and  must 
maintain  that  superiority  by  separating  himself  from 
them.  There  ought  to  be  no  intermarriage  between 
Jew  and  non-Jew.  The  Jewish  blood  must  be  kept 
pure.  So  Ezra  (9: 1 — 10:44)  is  reported  to  have  induced 
his  contemporaries  to  put  away  their  non- Jewish  wives 
with  their  children.  The  same  attitude  of  mind  appears 
in  Num.  25:6-18,  where  it  is  related  that  when  an 
Israelite  brought  a  Midianitish  wife  into  the  camp  a 
plague  broke  out  and  slew  24,000  people  before  it  was 
stopped  by  the  killing  of  the  offending  couple.  It 
appears  also  in  II  Chron.  24:26,  where  the  narrative 
as  it  was  presented  in  II  Kings  12:21  suffers  a  slight 
but  significant  change,  in  that  the  assassins  of  Joash  the 
king  are  made  to  have  been  sons  of  a  Moabite  woman 
and  an  Ammonite  woman,  respectively.  Edom  comes 
in  for  a  full  share  of  this  hostility  and  hatred  toward 
foreigners.  In  II  Chron.  25:11-12,  the  narrative  in 
Kangs  that  Amaziah  of  Judah  slew  10,000  Edomites  in 
battle  is  augmented  by  the  further  statement  that  he 
captured  another  10,000  and  hurled  them  down  headlong 
from  the  top  of  a  cliff.  Yet  in  I  Chron.  2:34  f.,  a  Jewish 
father  is  recorded  as  having  given  his  daughter  in  mar- 


MORAL  STANDARDS  OF  LEGALISM 


295 


riage  to  his  Egyptian  slave,  and  no  blame  is  attached 
to  the  action. 

The  same  exclusiveness  is  carried  over  into  the  field 
of  religion.  Moabites  and  Ammonites  are  permanently 
shut  out  from  admission  into  the  congregation  of  Yahweh 
(Neh.  13:1);  and  no  foreigner  is  permitted  to  partake 
of  the  Passover  (Exod.  12:43).  The  superiority  of  the 
Jew  to  the  foreigner  is  brought  out  by  the  Chronicler  in 
his  records  of  the  relations  of  Israel  with  foreign  nations. 
Solomon  ruled  over  all  the  kings  of  the  earth  and  they 
brought  him  tribute  year  by  year  (II  Chron.  9:22-24, 
26).  Philistines  and  Arabs  likewise  brought  gifts  to  the 
good  king  Jehoshaphat  (II  Chron.  17:11,  12).  The 
God-fearing  Jews  did  not  need  to  fight  Moab  and  its 
allies;  they  merely  “stood  still  and  saw  the  deliverance 
of  Yahweh,”  while  their  foes  fell  one  upon  another  and 
killed  themselves  off  (II  Chron.,  chap.  20).  King  Asa 
of  Judah  is  denounced  for  having  called  in  Benhadad  of 
Syria  to  his  aid  in  his  war  with  Northern  Israel  instead 
of  having  put  his  full  trust  in  Yahweh  (II  Chron.  16: 
i-4,  7)- 

190.  Attitude  toward  Northern  Israel. — This  hostile 
attitude  toward  foreigners  was  likewise  held  toward 
Northern  Israel.  This  was  the  home  of  the  Samaritans 
and  the  Israelites  were  their  ancestors.  Consequently 
the  Israelites  are  the  victims  of  all  the  bitter  enmity 
felt  by  the  Jews  toward  the  Samaritans.  The  history 
of  Northern  Israel  is  left  out  wherever  possible,  and 
when  mentioned  it  is  almost  always  for  the  purpose  of 
condemnation.1  Amaziah  of  Judah  had  hired  Israeli tish 

^ee  I  Chron.  5:25,  26;  10:13,  14;  II  Chron.  20:35-37;  21:6, 
12-15,  18, 19;  22:7-9;  25:17-24. 


296  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


mercenaries  for  a  campaign  and  had  paid  them  in 
advance;  but  upon  the  bidding  of  a  prophet  who  prom- 
mised  him  his  money  back  and  greater  gain  from  Yahweh, 
he  sent  them  all  back  home  unused  (II  Chron.  25:5-10). 
In  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  Pekah  of  Israel,  who  had  carried 
captive  200,000  women  and  children  from  Judah,  was 
bidden  by  a  prophet  to  return  them  to  their  homes  and 
treat  them  with  all  kindness  and  consideration,  lest 
Yahweh  should  smite  Israel  which  already  had  too  much 
sin  to  its  account  (II  Chron.  28 : 9-15) !  When  Hezekiah 
invited  Northern  Israel  to  join  in  the  celebration  of  the 
Passover  at  Jerusalem  his  messengers  were  laughed  to 
scorn  and  mocked  by  the  Israelites  (II  Chron.  30:10). 
In  the  days  of  Nehemiah,  the  Samaritans  opposed  and 
hindered  him  in  every  way  as  he  set  himself  to  the  task 
of  rebuilding  the  walls  of  Jerusalem;  and  Nehemiah  re¬ 
taliated  by  calling  down  the  vengeance  of  Yahweh  upon 
them  (Neh.  4:1-5;  6:1-14). 

191.  In  reckoning  with  the  moral  limitations  of  this 
priestly  element  we  must  give  full  weight  to  the  narrow, 
restrictive,  and  exclusive  spirit  in  Judaism.  This  priestly 
literature  perpetuates  that  spirit.  In  the  days  of  Nehe¬ 
miah  and  Ezra  the  narrow,  sectarian,  and  particularistic 
elements  in  Judaism  won  the  supremacy  in  the  com¬ 
munity’s  councils.  Broad-minded  patriots,  such  as  gave 
utterance  to  the  sentiments  of  the  Book  of  Ruth,  the 
story  of  Jonah,  and  certain  parts  of  Isaiah,  chapters 
56-66,  were  then  silenced.  The  right  of  way  was  given 
to  these  minds  of  a  lower  order.  In  the  ethical  narrow¬ 
ness  and  dulness  of  these  priestly  documents  we  see 
these  strict  and  narrow-minded  Jews  at  their  worst. 
They  were  not  wholly  incapable  of  high  idealism  and 


MORAL  STANDARDS  OF  LEGALISM 


297 


noble  enthusiasm  as  we  shall  see  in  our  next  chapter. 
But  their  narrow  and  legalistic  minds  do  not  appear  to 
advantage  in  the  field  of  ethics. 

192.  A  traditional  view. — The  old  doctrine  against 
which  Job  had  so  effectively  protested,  viz.,  that  the 
pious  prosper  and  the  wicked  suffer,  is  reaffirmed  in  these 
writings  without  any  recognition  of  its  incompleteness  or 
inadequacy.1  The  flood  was  punishment  for  sin;  the 
Exile  was  due  to  Israel’s  sin.  The  pious  David  prospered 
and  died  at  an  advanced  age  full  of  riches  and  honor. 
The  good  priest  Jehoiada  lived  to  be  one  hundred  and 
thirty  years  old.  A  small  Aramaean  army  was  given  vic¬ 
tory  over  a  large  Jewish  force  on  account  of  the  wicked¬ 
ness  of  King  Joash.  The  pious  Nehemiah  asks  Yahweh’s 
blessing  in  view  of  the  fact  that  he  has  not  used  govern¬ 
ment  funds  for  the  maintenance  of  his  establishment,  but 
has  spent  his  own  money  (Neh.  5:14-19).  He  counts 
confidently  upon  his  various  good  deeds  being  entered 
to  his  credit  upon  the  day-book  of  Yahweh.  “Remem¬ 
ber  me,  O  my  God,  for  this  and  wipe  not  out  my  good 
deeds  that  I  have  done  for  the  house  of  my  God  and  for 
the  wards  thereof”  (Neh.  13:14;  cf.  13:226,  316).  But 
the  good  are  kept  humble  by  the  thought  that  there  are 
none  without  sin  in  the  sight  of  God  (II  Chron.  6:36). 
Not  only  so,  but  concrete  blessings  of  a  materialistic 
sort,  such  as  riches,  honor,  long  life,  and  revenge 
upon  foes,  are  held  to  be  of  a  value  inferior  to  that 
of  more  spiritual  gifts.  Hence  Solomon  who  asked 
only  for  these  latter  is  given  all.  The  richest  blessings 

1  See  Gen.  6:11-13;  I  Chron.  2:3;  4:41;  9:1;  11:9;  22:11,  13; 
28:7;  29:28;  II  Chron.  6:36-39;  7:17-22;  17:5;  24:20-25;  26:5-21; 
27:6;  28: 1-5,  19-21. 


298  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


are  the  possession  of  wisdom  and  knowledge  (II  Chron. 
1 : 10-12). 

193.  Breaches  of  the  moral  law. — Amid  the  many 
demands  of  the  priestly  and  ritualistic  interest,  it  would 
not  have  been  strange  if  the  requirements  of  ethics  had 
received  no  notice.  But  attention  is  called  to  some 
breaches  of  the  moral  law  and  its  claims  are  enforced. 
Intertribal  wars  are  wrong  (II  Chron.  11:1-4).  Blood- 
revenge  is  imperative  in  its  demands;  but  cities  of  refuge 
are  provided  for  the  accidental  homicide.1  The  fore¬ 
closure  of  mortgages  held  by  rich  Jews  upon  the  lands, 
goods,  and  persons  of  poor  Jewish  debtors  was  vehe¬ 
mently  denounced  by  Nehemiah,  who  demanded  the 
remission  of  such  debts;  and  his  demands  were  granted 
(Neh.  5 : 1-13).  Among  the  sins  penalized  in  the  priestly 
law  are  misuse  of  funds  deposited  for  safekeeping;  hard 
bargains;  robbery;  oppression;  retention  of  lost  articles 
by  a  finder  who  lies  and  swears  falsely  regarding  his  find; 
failure  to  tell  the  whole  truth  in  your  possession  if  called 
into  court  as  a  witness;  and  swearing  to  do  something 
which  turns  out  to  be  an  evil  thing  (Lev.  6 : 1-7 ;  5:1,4). 
It  is  the  duty  of  a  king  to  enforce  justice  and  righteous¬ 
ness  (II  Chron.  9:8).  Judges  act  not  for  men,  but  as 
the  representatives  of  God;  hence  there  must  be  no 
iniquity  in  their  decisions,  no  respect  of  persons,  no 
bribery  (II  Chron.  19:5-9).  God  himself  is  the  supreme 
judge  and  in  the  last  resort  will  discriminate  between 
the  righteous  and  the  wicked  in  the  taking  of  oaths 
(II  Chron.  6:22-23). 

194.  The  non- ethical  in  general  and  the  ritualistic  in 
particular  are  so  enlarged  upon  and  emphasized  as  to 

1  Gen.  9:5,  6;  Num.  35:9-34;  Josh.  20:7-9. 


MORAL  STANDARDS  OF  LEGALISM 


299 


imperil  the  right  evaluation  of  the  ethical  by  the  masses. 
All  Israel  swears  to  put  to  death  any  Jew  that  will  not 
“seek  Yahweh”  (II  Chron.  15:12-15).  Sin  may  be  com¬ 
mitted  “unwittingly,”  i.e.,  without  knowing  or  intend¬ 
ing  it.  The  whole  congregation  of  Israel  may  commit 
such  sin  and  become  “guilty.”  Even  to  touch  an 
“unclean”  thing  unwittingly  is  to  become  “guilty.”1 
The  violation  of  the  Sabbath  is  a  capital  offense;  even 
so  slight  a  labor  as  picking  up  a  few  sticks  is  punished 
by  death.2  Death  is  inflicted  upon  the  one  who  eats 
the  flesh  of  the  peace-offering  when  unclean;  eats  fat,  or 
drinks  blood;  touches  the  sanctuary  when  helping  to 
transport  it;  or  fails  to  keep  the  Passover  if  at  home  at 
the  time  and  if  ritually  “clean.”3  Nadab  and  Abihu  were 
slain  by  fire  from  Yahweh  because  they  offered  incense 
of  strange  fire;  and  Yahweh  was  so  incensed  by  their 
conduct  that  he  was  liable  to  blaze  forth  in  fiery  wrath 
upon  the  whole  congregation  (Lev.  10:  iff.).  Upon 
another  occasion  the  anger  of  Yahweh,  which  impresses 
us  as  somewhat  childish,  was  assuaged  and  halted  in  its 
destructive  course  by  the  interposition  of  Moses  and 
Aaron  with  incense,  but  not  until  it  had  already  slain 
14,700  members  of  the  congregation  (Num.  16:41-50). 
When  a  thing  has  been  set  aside  for  Yahweh  under  the 
ban,  it  may  not  be  withdrawn;  even  a  man  under  such 
circumstances  cannot  be  redeemed — he  must  be  put  to 
death  (Lev.  27:27-29).  Such  a  law  presupposes  and 
recognizes  the  right  of  one  man  or  a  group  of  men  to 
dispose  of  another  man’s  life.  Probably  the  victim 

1  Lev.  4: 2,  13,  22,  27;  5:2,  15,  17,  18;  Num.  15:24,  26,  27  f. 

2  Exod.  16:22-30;  31:14;  Num.  15:32-36. 

3  Lev.  7: 19-27;  Num.  4: 15,  20;  9: 13. 


3°° 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


contemplated  was  a  slave  or  a  captive;  and  probably, 
likewise,  such  a  law  was  never  actually  enforced. 

With  reference  to  these  non-ethical  regulations  two 
things  are  notable.  First,  that  there  is  a  great  disregard 
of  the  rights  of  personality  and  even  of  human  life  itself. 
Secondly,  that  these  death  penalties  are  imposed  pre¬ 
vailingly  for  ritualistic  derelictions.  The  penalties  for 
the  violation  or  neglect  of  ritual  are  on  the  whole  much 
more  severe  than  those  imposed  upon  violations  of  the 
moral  law.  This  is  in  keeping  with  the  whole  spirit  of 
the  priestly  writers  and  lawmakers,  in  that  breaches  of 
the  moral  law  are  primarily  offenses  against  man,  whereas 
violations  of  the  laws  of  ritual  were  thought  of  as  sins 
against  God  himself,  and  so  far  more  heinous. 

195.  A  certain  lack  of  keen  ethical  insight  is  seen  in 
the  deliberate  perversion  and  misrepresentation  of  fact 
so  characteristic  of  these  priestly  writers,  and  especially 
of  the  Chronicler.  There  is  a  notable  disregard  for  the 
exact  truth,  a  too  easy-going  attitude  toward  historical 
sources,  a  failure  to  recognize  the  importance  of  a  knowl¬ 
edge  of  the  facts.  There  is  no  more  dangerous  proceed¬ 
ing  than  to  treat  history  disrespectfully  and  to  wrest  it 
violently  from  its  true  meaning.  History  is  mankind’s 
greatest  teacher.  But  its  lessons  are  lost  if  we  fail  to 
listen  to  its  utterances  with  close  attention  and  respect. 
The  actual  facts  of  history  are  in  the  long  run  more 
instructive  and  helpful  to  the  succeeding  generations 
than  any  wrong  interpretation  that  anybody  can  tempo¬ 
rarily  impose  upon  them.  But  the  priestly  writers  did 
not  merely  misinterpret  history;  they  destroyed  it,  and 
substituted  a  new  record  of  their  own  making,  supplying 
both  the  facts  and  the  interpretation  thereof. 


MORAL  STANDARDS  OF  LEGALISM 


301 


196.  The  legalistic  attitude  of  the  priestly  school  of 
writers  was  that  which  came  to  dominate  the  life  of 
later  Judaism  as  a  whole.  It  found  its  logical  fulfilment 
in  Pharisaism,  which  has,  of  course,  been  too  harshly 
judged.  But  the  legalistic  mind  sought  to  secure  the 
divine  favor  by  a  literalistic  obedience  to  every  detail  of 
the  divine  will  as  formulated  in  the  law.  This  law  was 
expanded  and  interpreted  to  fit  and  cover  every  aspect 
of  life.  Salvation  meant  conformity  to  every  jot  and 
tittle.  But  such  an  attitude  is  that  of  a  slave,  rather  than 
a  free  man.  It  represents  a  cramping  of  the  spirit,  a 
throttling  of  life.  It  is  death  to  all  liberty  of  thought 
and  all  spontaneity  of  life.  It  substitutes  an  external 
authority  for  an  inner  spirit.  It  kills  the  creative  mind. 
It  substitutes  fetters  for  wings. 

In  small  matters  there  is  some  advance  beyond  the 
earlier  records  on  the  part  of  these  later  writers.  In 
I  Chron.  2:4,  there  is  no  mention  of  Tamar’s  strategy 
in  ensnaring  Judah.  In  the  story  of  the  bringing  up  of 
the  ark  to  Jerusalem,  David  is  provided  with  decent 
clothing  (I  Chron.  15:27).  The  Bathsheba  episode  is 
entirely  omitted  from  David’s  life-story.  In  the  account 
of  David’s  census  of  all  Israel,  Satan  is  made  to  come  in 
and  displace  Yahweh  in  bearing  the  responsibility  for 
moving  David  to  commit  this  great  sin  (I  Chron.  21:1). 

In  this  chapter  we  have  met  the  priestly  spirit  on  its 
lower  levels;  in  the  next,  we  shall  find  it  in  its  highest 
outreachings  and  shall  come  to  see  how  great  things  can 
be  done  and  can  be  endured  by  people  of  limited  outlook 
when  doing  their  best. 


CHAPTER  XVI 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 

197.  Life  in  Palestine  during  the  first  half  of  the 
second  century  b.c.  was  fraught  with  interest  and  danger 
for  the  Jewish  people.  They  were  under  the  necessity 
of  submission  to  a  series  of  changing  rulers,  all  of  whom 
were  chiefly  concerned  with  extracting  money  from  their 
subjects  that  they  might  be  able  to  finance  their  continual 
wars.  But  with  the  accession  of  Antiochus  IV  (175 
b.c.),  the  situation  became  acute  and  the  tyranny  of  the 
master  more  and  more  intolerable.  Antiochus  organized 
an  expedition  against  Egypt  in  173  b.c.  and  got  as  far 
as  Alexandria,  to  which  he  laid  siege.  But  he  was 
unable  to  push  this  to  a  successful  issue  on  account  of 
disturbed  conditions  in  Syria,  whither  he  hastened  back. 
On  the  way  he  paused  long  enough  to  go  up  to  Jerusa¬ 
lem  and  plunder  the  temple,  killing  many  of  the  leading 
citizens. 

198.  The  situation  in  Jerusalem  gave  him  an  ostensible 
pretext  for  this  procedure.  There  had  long  been  there 
a  sharp  diversion  of  sentiment  that  had  split  the  people 
into  two  factions.  Alexander’s  program  for  the  Hellen- 
ization  of  the  Orient  had  been  continued  by  his  successors 
and  had  found  many  adherents  in  Judea  itself.  Those 
who  were  faithful  to  the  old  Jewish  ideals  had  become 
more  zealous  in  their  defense  as  they  saw  them  imperiled 
by  advancing  Hellenism.  Hence  the  community  was 
divided  between  the  Hellenists  and  the  loyalists.  Anti¬ 
ochus  IV  found  the  former  willing  adherents  to  his  policy 


302 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 


303 


of  Hellenization  and  co-operated  with  them.  Onias,  the 
High  Priest,  who  was  naturally  a  supporter  of  strict 
Judaism,  was  displaced  early  in  the  new  reign  by  Jason, 
a  Hellenistic  Jew,  who  bribed  Antiochus  to  appoint  him 
High  Priest,  promising  him  heavier  tribute  and  a 
vigorous  program  of  Hellenization.  In  accordance  with 
this,  a  gymnasium  was  built  close  by  the  temple,  and 
the  Greek  games  there  carried  on  attracted  many  of  the 
priests  themselves  to  a  participation  in  them.  Many 
Jews  who  took  up  with  the  new  life  sought  to  protect 
themselves  from  ridicule  by  undergoing  an  operation 
for  the  removal  of  the  mark  of  circumcision.  The  two 
opposing  groups  of  the  faithful  and  the  Hellenizers  came 
to  blows,  and  Onias  was  forced  to  flee  to  Egypt  for  safety. 
But  Jason  was  in  turn  deposed  from,  and  succeeded  in, 
the  High  Priesthood,  which  was  now  for  sale  to  the 
highest  bidder,  by  Menelaus,  who  offered  a  larger 
bribe.  Jason  sought  to  recover  his  office  by  force  and 
succeeded  in  imprisoning  Menelaus  while  Andochus  was 
campaigning  in  Egypt.  These  proceedings  furnished  an 
excuse  for  the  visit  of  Antiochus  to  Jerusalem  and  his 
drastic  treatment  of  the  city. 

199.  The  Maccabaean  revolt. — Two  years  later  Anti¬ 
ochus  was  turned  back  from  another  attempt  to  conquer 
Egypt  by  a  Roman  legate  who  forbade  his  further  prog¬ 
ress  under  the  penalty  of  the  hostility  of  the  Imperial 
City.  Upon  his  return  Antiochus  gave  orders  for  a 
most  rigorous  treatment  of  the  Jews.  They  were  for¬ 
bidden  to  practice  circumcision  upon  pain  of  death  to 
all  concerned.  The  reading  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures 
was  proscribed,  and  orders  given  to  destroy  such  writings 
wherever  found.  Observance  of  the  Sabbath  was  pro- 


304 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


hibited.  The  offerings  and  sacrifices  in  the  temple  were 
brought  to  an  end.  In  short,  the  king  sought  to  banish 
the  worship  of  Yahweh  from  the  land  and  to  establish 
the  cults  of  the  Greek  gods  in  its  place.  The  crowning 
insult  was  the  erection  of  a  Greek  altar  upon  the  top 
of  the  altar  of  Yahweh  in  the  temple  and  the  sacrifice  of 
swine  and  other  unclean  things  thereupon.  This  is 
Daniel’s  “  abomination  of  desolation.”  Many  of  the 
faithful  suffered  death  rather  than  to  be  disloyal  to 
their  most  holy  faith.  Finally,  Mattathias,  a  priest, 
slew  a  renegade  Jew  who  stepped  forward  to  sacrifice 
upon  the  Greek  altar  at  Modin.  He  thereupon  slew 
the  king’s  officer,  leveled  the  pagan  altar  to  the 
ground,  and  then  took  to  the  hills  with  his  five 
sons.  More  and  more  of  like  mind  gathered  about 
them  and  the  Maccabaean  revolt  was  on.1  It  was  to 
hearten  and  sustain  the  pious  while  they  were  passing 
through  such  terrific  trials  that  the  writings  we  take  up 
in  this  chapter  were  prepared.  They  were  campaign 
documents.  They  were  to  build  up  and  maintain  the 
morale  of  a  small  group  of  faithful  Jews  fighting  against 
tremendous  odds  for  the  right  to  worship  God  according 
to  the  dictates  of  their  own  conscience. 

200.  The  story  of  Esther. — One  way  to  furnish  inspira¬ 
tion  and  to  stimulate  courage  was  to  tell  stories  of  the 
wonderful  deeds  of  Yahweh  in  days  gone  by  in  behalf  of 
his  hard-pressed  people.  If  he  had  intervened  thus 
marvelously  in  order  to  deliver  those  who  were  loyal  to 
him  in  the  past,  could  he  not  be  depended  upon  to  do 
the  same  thing  again  in  these  days  when  his  loyal  people 

1  The  source  of  our  information  for  this  state  of  affairs  is  I  Maccabees, 
chaps,  i  and  2. 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 


305 


are  oppressed  beyond  endurance?  This  kind  of  liter¬ 
ature  is  seen  at  its  worst  ethically  in  the  Book  of  Esther.1 
Queen  Vashti  refuses  to  present  herself  before  her 
drunken  lord  and  master,  valuing  the  dignity  of  her  own 
person  too  highly  to  permit  herself  to  be  made  the  play¬ 
thing  of  a  drunken  court.  This  insubordination  is 
punished  by  her  ejection  from  her  exalted  position.  The 
motive  for  this  severe  punishment  is  that  a  proper 
example  may  be  set  to  other  wives  in  order  that  hus¬ 
bands  may  not  become  contemptible  in  the  eyes  of  their 
wives.  This  attributes  to  the  Persians  a  conception  of 
the  subordination  of  wives  to  husbands  that  was  all  too 
well  known  among  the  Jews  themselves.  The  removal  of 
Vashti  opens  the  way  for  the  rise  of  the  Jewess  Esther  to 
the  supreme  honor  available  to  women  in  that  day.  To 
Esther  comes  the  great  opportunity  of  serving  and  saving 
her  own  people.  The  wicked  Haman  has  obtained 
from  the  king  a  decree  authorizing  the  slaughter  of  all 
Jews  throughout  the  empire.  Mordecai,  Esther’s  uncle, 
adjures  Esther  to  intercede  for  her  own  people,  saying 
unto  her,  “Who  knows  but  that  thou  art  come  to  the 
kingdom  for  such  a  time  as  this  ?”  Esther  accepts  the 
responsibility  and  undertakes  to  present  herself  before 
the  King  even  though  she  thereby  imperils  her  life,  saying, 
“If  I  perish,  I  perish.”  This  is  the  highest  ideal  in  the 
book;  and  it  is  embodied  in  the  act  and  attitude  of  a 
woman.  She  is  willing  to  lose  her  life  in  an  attempt  to 
save  her  people’s  life. 

201.  The  downfall  of  Haman. — At  this  point  a  brief 
interlude  is  permitted  in  which  Haman,  the  bitter 

1  The  best  English  commentary  on  Esther  is  that  by  Lewis  B.  Paton 
in  the  International  Critical  Commentary. 


306  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


enemy  of  the  Jews,  meets  his  proper  fate,  and  Mordecai 
is  given  the  highest  honors.  The  king  is  represented  as 
cleverly  leading  Haman  on  to  name  the  honors  that  shall 
be  showered  upon  Mordecai  on  the  supposition  that  he  is 
naming  honors  to  be  bestowed  upon  himself.  But  when 
he  has  named  all  the  things  that  he  covets  for  himself, 
he  finds  himself  asked  to  bestow  them  upon  Mordecai, 
the  Jew.  Not  only  so,  but  charges  are  preferred  against 
Haman  that  lead  him  to  plead  with  Esther  for  protection. 
At  this  juncture  Ahasuerus  appears  and  is  enraged  by 
Hainan’s  conduct  so  that  he  decrees  that  he  be  hung. 
The  last  touch  to  this  bit  of  poetic  justice  is  given  in  the 
fact  that  Haman  is  hung  upon  the  gallows  he  had  him¬ 
self  ordered  built  for  the  Jew,  Mordecai. 

202.  The  main  theme  of  the  story  is  now  brought  to  a 
conclusion.  Esther  and  Mordecai  procure  from  Ahas¬ 
uerus  a  decree  to  offset  the  earlier  edict  that  decreed 
the  destruction  of  the  Jews.  This  new  decree  authorizes 
the  Jews  to  defend  themselves  against  their  enemies  who 
were  bent  upon  their  extermination.  So  the  Jews  armed 
themselves  and  upon  the  day  decreed  for  their  slaughter 
they  set  upon  their  foes  and  cut  them  down  ruthlessly, 
the  fear  of  Mordecai,  now  in  the  highest  place  of  power, 
having  fallen  upon  all  the  peoples. 

203.  Purpose  of  the  Book  of  Esther. — This  story,  which 
is  wholly  lacking  in  historical  basis  of  fact,  is  full  of  race 
prejudice,  national  hatred,  and  revenge.  But  it  served 
the  purpose  of  stirring  up  the  national  and  religious 
loyalty  of  the  Jews  and  helped  to  strengthen  their  faith 
in  the  goodness  and  power  of  their  God.  The  story  in 
its  present  form  was  probably  not  written  down  until 
toward  the  last  third  of  the  second  century  b.c.,  after 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 


307 


the  Maccabaean  struggle  had  succeeded.  But  it  reflects 
the  feelings  of  the  faithful  in  that  struggle  and 
immediately  thereafter;  and  shows  that  Judaism  knew 
how  to  hate  wholeheartedly. 

204.  The  Book  of  Daniel . — Another  bit  of  story¬ 
telling  literature  from  this  same  general  period,  which 
served  to  hearten  the  faithful  in  the  Maccabaean  strug¬ 
gle,  is  found  in  Daniel,  chapters  1-6. 1  These  stories  tell 
of  men  being  loyal  to  their  ideals  at  the  peril  of  their  lives 
and  of  their  being  sustained  in  their  idealism  and  glo¬ 
riously  vindicated  by  the  power  of  God.  Daniel  and  his 
three  friends,  for  example,  when  chosen  to  go  into 
training  for  high  positions  in  the  Babylonian  court, 
refuse  to  defile  themselves  by  eating  of  the  food  and 
drink  provided  by  the  king.  They  requested  that  they 
be  put  upon  a  diet  of  pulse  and  water  and,  notwithstand¬ 
ing  this  scant  fare,  at  the  end  of  the  training  period  they 
were  found  to  be  “ten  times  better”  both  in  physical 
condition  and  in  mental  attainments  than  all  the  magi¬ 
cians  and  enchanters  that  were  in  all  the  king’s  realm. 
The  value  of  such  a  story  in  a  period  when  the  govern¬ 
ment  was  insisting  upon  the  disregard  of  all  Jewish 
dietary  laws  is  at  once  evident. 

205.  The  story  of  Shadrach ,  Meshach,  and  Abednego 
and  the  Fiery  Furnace  is  another  case  in  point.  Nebu¬ 
chadnezzar  made  a  golden  image  and  decreed  that  all 
men  should  worship  it  at  stated  times.  The  three  youths 

1  The  best  English  commentaries  on  the  Book  of  Daniel  are  those 
by  S.  R.  Driver  (Cambridge  Bible,  1900),  R.  H.  Charles  (New  Century 
Bible),  A.  A.  Bevan  (1892),  and  J.  D.  Prince  (1899).  It  is  more  than 
probable  that  the  stories  in  Dan.,  chaps.  1-6,  were  in  circulation  a  century 
or  two  before  the  Maccabaean  period,  though  the  present  Book  of  Daniel 
is  a  Maccabaean  product. 


308  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


are  accused  of  failure  to  obey  this  decree  and  are  sum¬ 
moned  before  the  king.  When  he  threatens  them  with 
death  by  fire  if  they  persist  in  their  refusal  to  bow  down 
before  his  idol  they  reply  to  the  effect  that  even  if  their 
God  should  not  deliver  them  from  this  awful  death, 
nevertheless,  “be  it  known  unto  thee,  0  King,  that  we 
will  not  worship  thy  god,  and  we  will  not  bow  down  to 
the  golden  image  which  thou  hast  set  up.”  After  this 
there  is  nothing  for  the  king  to  do  but  to  carry  out  his 
threat.  The  furnace  is  heated  seven  times  hotter  than 
usual,  so  hot,  indeed,  that  as  the  men  cast  in  the 
three  youths,  they  themselves  are  slain  by  the  heat. 
Yet  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego  suffer  no  harm 
from  the  flames,  not  even  was  the  hair  of  their  heads 
singed;  their  bonds  only  were  burned,  allowing  them  to 
walk  about  freely  in  the  glowing  furnace.  The  king 
cries  out  in  amazement  as  he  sees  four  men  in  the  fur¬ 
nace  and  the  appearance  of  the  fourth  like  that  of  a 
divine  being.  The  youths  are  given  their  liberty  and  a 
decree  made  that  their  God  must  be  treated  with  rever¬ 
ence  upon  pain  of  death  to  all  offenders.  The  bearing 
of  such  a  story  is  at  once  apparent  when  we  recall  that 
Antiochus  decreed  death  to  all  who  should  fail  to  sacrifice 
and  worship  before  the  Greek  gods. 

206.  Daniel  and  the  lions. — Of  similar  aim  and  pur¬ 
port  is  the  story  of  Daniel  in  the  Lion’s  Den.  Darius 
the  king  made  a  decree  that  for  the  next  thirty  days  no 
one  could  worship  or  pray  to  any  god  save  the  king 
himself,  on  pain  of  being  cast  to  the  lions.  Daniel 
continued  to  pray  three  times  a  day  kneeling  down 
before  his  open  window  as  his  custom  was.  This  dis¬ 
obedience  is  at  once  reported  to  Darius  and  he  is  forced, 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 


309 


notwithstanding  his  liking  for  Daniel,  to  order  his 
commitment  to  the  lions’  den.  After  a  bad  night,  due 
to  his  troubled  conscience,  Darius  goes  early  in  the 
morning  to  the  den  and  to  his  astonishment  and  joy 
finds  Daniel  alive  and  unharmed.  Thereupon  Daniel  is 
released  and  the  men  who  had  accused  him  are  cast 
into  the  lions’  den  together  with  their  wives  and  children, 
and  before  they  had  so  much  as  reached  the  bottom  of 
the  den  they  were  torn  in  pieces  by  the  hungry  beasts. 
Darius  then  decrees  that  the  entire  kingdom  of  Persia 
“  tremble  and  fear  before  the  God  of  Daniel.”  It  must 
be  noted  here  that  at  so  late  a  period  as  this — the  middle 
of  the  second  century  b.c. — the  ethical  conscience  of  the 
Jew  found  no  offense  in  the  thought  of  revenge  upon 
the  foes  of  Judaism  and  did  not  revolt  against  involving 
innocent  women  and  children  in  the  punitive  fate  of 
their  husbands  and  fathers.  The  old  sense  of  family 
solidarity  was  still  deeply  rooted. 

207.  The  purpose  of  apocalyptic  writings. — Alongside 
of  this  story-telling  literature,  there  was  current  an 
entirely  different  kind  that  had  the  same  aim,  viz.,  to 
keep  up  the  morale  of  Judaism  in  times  of  stress  and 
strain.  This  is  known  as  Apocalyptic  Literature. 
Typical  examples  of  it  are  the  Book  of  Enoch  and  the 
last  six  chapters  of  Daniel.  The  method  and  purpose 
of  such  literature  are  readily  discernible.  The  writers 
seek  to  bring  encouragement,  with  renewed  and  invigor¬ 
ating  faith,  to  their  contemporaries  living  in  troublous 
and  terrible  times.  They  despair  of  any  help  from  man 
against  the  overwhelming  forces  of  evil  arrayed  in  opposi¬ 
tion  to  the  righteous;  but  they  look  forward  confidently 
to  a  miraculous  intervention  by  God  in  behalf  of  his 


3io  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

< 

pious  children.  They  seek  to  strengthen  their  struggling 
and  well-nigh  fainting  brethren  by  imparting  to  them 
something  of  the  same  faith  and  hope  that  fill  their  own 
souls.  The  common  method  of  doing  this  is  to  select 
some  ancient  worthy,  like  Enoch,  Noah,  Abraham, 
Moses,  Isaiah,  or  Daniel,  and  make  him  the  mouthpiece 
of  a  revelation  from  God.  Such  an  one  from  ancient 
times  is  represented  as  having  received  from  God  in 
advance  an  account  of  the  course  of  later  history  and  as 
having  put  this  predictive  narrative  on  record.  It  is 
now  brought  to  light,  after  centuries  in  hiding,  that  it 
may  hearten  the  faithful  in  their  great  trial.  It  presents 
a  great  series  of  world-pictures,  beginning  at  some  point 
in  the  actual  past,  not  only  portraying  the  course  of 
world-history  as  it  has  thus  far  actually  developed,  but 
also  passing  on  from  the  known  present  into  the  unknown 
future.  This  future  always  holds  in  store  for  the  pious 
a  sure  deliverance  and  a  glorification.  The  argument 
is  to  the  effect  that  since  the  ancient  seer’s  prediction  of 
the  course  of  history  has  been  fulfilled  up  to  the  present 
time,  he  ought  on  all  counts  to  be  given  confidence  and 
trust  in  reference  to  his  predictions  regarding  the  still 
unknown  future.  The  fundamental  conviction  lying 
behind  all  such  literature  is  that  this  is  a  moral  universe 
and  under  the  control  of  the  God  of  the  Jews;  therefore 
Judaism  and  its  adherents  must  in  the  very  nature  of 
things  receive  vindication  and  glorification  at  the  hands 
of  its  God  in  the  immediate  future.  A  good  and  God¬ 
fearing  people  cannot  be  forever  ruthlessly  trampled 
into  the  dust  by  its  foes  with  impunity. 

208.  The  Book  of  Enoch. — The  two  products  of  the 
apocalyptic  mind  that  belong  to  the  Old  Testament 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 


3  ii 

period  are  the  earlier  portions  of  the  Book  of  Enoch 
and  the  latter  half  of  the  Book  of  Daniel.  We  turn  to 
the  Book  of  Enoch  first.  The  parts  of  Enoch  that  may 
with  reasonable  assurance  be  assigned  to  the  period  before 
and  during  the  Maccabaean  revolt  are  chapters  6-36  and 
83-90.  It  may  also  be  that  93:1-10  and  91:12-17 
should  be  assigned  to  this  same  general  period.1  There 
is  not  much  of  detail  in  the  field  of  morals  in  these  chap¬ 
ters.  But  what  little  there  is  calls  for  consideration. 
For  the  first  time  in  Hebrew  thought  the  task  of  moral 
discrimination  is  carried  over  into  the  region  beyond  the 
grave.  There  the  good  and  the  bad  are  reckoned  with 
according  to  their  deserts.  In  Sheol  the  departed  spirits 
are  classified  under  three  categories  (Enoch  22:8-14). 
These  are  (1)  the  righteous,  (2)  sinners  who  are  not 
judged  while  living,  who  are  to  continue  till  the  great 
day  of  judgment,  and  (3)  sinners  who  received  some 
punishment  in  the  form  of  suffering  while  they  were 
upon  earth.  The  final  judgment  mentioned  is  to  take 
place  in  the  “valley  of  the  accursed”  (27:2),  and  is  to 
take  place  at  the  end  of  the  last  ten  weeks.  In  the  eighth 
week  “ all  mankind  shall  look  to  the  path  of  righteous¬ 
ness.”  In  the  ninth  week  “the  righteous  judgment 
shall  be  revealed  to  the  whole  world.”  “All  the  works 
of  the  godless  shall  vanish  from  all  the  earth;  and  the 
world  shall  be  written  down  for  destruction.” 

And  after  this  in  the  tenth  week  in  the  seventh  part, 

There  shall  be  the  great  eternal  judgment, 

In  which  He  will  execute  vengeance  amongst  the  angels; 

And  the  first  heaven  shall  depart  and  pass  away, 

And  a  new  heaven  shall  appear, 

1  So  R.  H.  Charles,  Apocrypha  and  Pseudepigrapha. 


312 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


And  all  the  powers  of  the  heavens  shall  give  sevenfold 
light, 

And  after  that  will  be  many  weeks  without  number  for 
ever. 

And  all  shall  be  in  goodness  and  righteousness, 

And  sin  shall  no  more  be  mentioned  for  ever 
[Enoch  91 : 15-17]. 

209.  Such  words  reveal  the  prevailing  characteristic  of 
Apocalypticism. — The  seer  despairs  of  humanity.  It  has 
no  power  to  renovate  itself.  It  is  hopelessly  enmeshed 
in  the  toils  of  evil,  and  cannot  lift  itself  to  the  higher 
moral  levels.  Nevertheless,  the  seers  do  not  despair  of 
their  ideals.  These  must  arrive.  Therefore  they  count 
upon  God  to  enforce  them.  The  power  of  God  will 
achieve  that  which  surpassed  the  strength  of  mere  men. 
They  are  firmly  convinced  of  the  justice  of  God;  and 
with  unshakable  faith  and  resolution  they  wait  for  its 
manifestation  among  men.  They  call  upon  the  divine 
world  to  supplement  the  defects  of  the  present  world 
and  they  bear  the  pains  and  disappointments  of  the 
dispensation  that  now  is  in  hope  of  sharing  the  triumph 
and  blessedness  of  an  age  to  come  when  all  existing 
wrongs  shall  be  righted. 

210.  The  last  six  chapters  of  Daniel  approach  the 
problem  of  the  vindication  of  the  righteous  people  of 
God  in  the  same  way.  They  represeent  the  seer  Daniel 
as  having  lived  in  the  period  of  the  Exile  and  as  having 
received  from  God  a  series  of  visions  in  which  he  is 
shown  pictorially  the  succeeding  course  of  history, 
commencing  with  his  own  day  and  continuing  through 
the  Maccabaean  struggle  until  its  consummation  in  the 
Kingdom  of  God,  which  is  to  be  manifested  and  estab- 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 


313 


lished  upon  earth  in  the  days  immediately  following  the 
writer’s  own  time.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  record  of 
the  history  of  the  earlier  postexilic  age  is  rather  vague 
and  at  times  inaccurate,  but  that  the  events  immediately 
preceding  the  Maccabaean  revolt  are  detailed  with 
considerable  minuteness,  while  the  immediate  future  is 
again  vague  and  general  and  not  entirely  in  accord 
with  the  history  which  actually  developed. 

21 1.  The  future  life. — One  detail  of  the  writer’s 
expectation  has  ethical  value.  He  is  looking  forward  to 
the  vindication  and  glorification  of  the  pious  Jewish 
nation.  This  is  to  come  without  delay.  But  the  reward 
to  be  received  by  those  who  have  engaged  in  the  present 
life-and-death  struggle  for  their  ideals  and  have  survived 
to  share  the  hoped-for  blessings  belongs  rightfully  also 
to  those  who  underwent  similar  trials  and  dangers  in 
days  of  the  near  and  more  distant  past  and  are  not  now 
alive  to  share  in  the  joys  of  the  coming  kingdom.  They 
earned  their  reward  as  fully  as  any  of  the  existing  genera¬ 
tion  and  they  ought  not  to  be  deprived  of  it.  Therefore, 
the  writer  of  Daniel  leaps  to  the  conclusion  that  they 
too  will  share  in  the  coming  vindication  of  the  pious  and 
that  to  that  end  they  will  be  restored  to  life  upon  earth. 

And  at  that  time  thy  people  shall  be  delivered, 

Every  one  that  is  found  written  in  the  book. 

And  many  of  those  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  ground 
shall  awake, 

Some  to  life  eternal, 

And  others  to  reproaches,  to  eternal  horror. 

But  the  wise  shall  shine  like  the  brightness  of  the  firma¬ 
ment, 

And  those  that  justify  many 

Like  the  stars  for  ever  and  aye  [Dan.  12:1-3]. 


314  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 

This  is  the  first  and  only  occurrence  in  the  Old 
Testament  proper  of  the  thought  that  moral  discrimina¬ 
tions  are  carried  beyond  the  grave.  It  takes  for  granted 
the  view  that  piety  is  not  necessarily  rewarded  in  the 
life  that  now  is  in  any  tangible  and  satisfactory  way; 
and  it  seeks  to  find  compensation  for  the  suffering  of  the 
present  in  the  glories  of  the  future.  Piety  must  be 
worth  while;  if  it  does  not  yield  full  satisfaction  on  the 
spot,  deferred  payments  may  be  anticipated  in  a  future 
existence.  The  doctrine  that  “virtue  is  its  own  reward” 
did  not  wholly  satisfy  the  Apocalyptists.  The  reason  for 
this  lay  partly  in  the  fact  that  they  were  too  material¬ 
istic  in  their  outlook  upon  life;  but  they  were  also 
jealous  for  the  reputation  of  God  among  men  in  general. 
This  consideration  demanded  a  public  manifestation  in 
unmistakable  terms  of  the  divine  justice,  that  all  men 
might  see  and  know  that  God  punishes  wickedness  and 
rewards  virtue.  It  thus  appears  that  the  doctrine  of  a 
bodily  resurrection  of  the  dead  was  to  a  large  extent 
born  out  of  a  moral  passion  that  set  death  at  naught 
in  the  effort  to  find  satisfaction  for  its  own  needs.  Both 
the  future  life  and  the  belief  in  monotheism  in  Israel 
found  their  strongest  support  on  ethical  grounds. 

Daniel  does  not  anticipate  a  universal  resurrection. 
Not  all  the  dead  will  arise,  but  “many”  will.  This  is 
not  a  carefully  and  systematically  thought-out  view  of  the 
future.  It  is  but  a  fragment  of  an  unknown  universe, 
which  the  mind  of  this  explorer  had  not  as  yet  traversed. 

212.  The  lack  of  the  historical  spirit. — One  other  aspect 
of  this  apocalyptic  literature  requires  consideration  from 
the  point  of  view  of  ethics.  As  has  been  observed,  the 
theory  of  such  books  as  Daniel  is  that  the  ancient  author 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 


315 


received  a  revelation  of  the  course  of  history  from  his 
own  day  on  to  the  coming  of  the  final  Golden  Age.  The 
force  of  the  argument  is  to  the  effect  that  this  revelation 
has  been  fulfilled  up  to  the  present  hour  as  any  student 
of  history  may  know;  therefore,  the  picture  of  the  imme¬ 
diate  future  should  also  be  accepted  and  given  full 
credence.  This  raises  two  questions  in  the  mind  of 
the  modern  man.  First,  would  the  pious  public  at  large 
readily  accept  such  representations?  Second,  how  did 
the  writers  themselves  think  of  their  own  work  ?  Were 
they  not  deliberately  making  false  claims  for  their  books, 
giving  them  an  antiquity  and  a  special  divine  authority 
to  which  they  could  lay  no  rightful  claim?  In  answer 
to  the  first  question,  it  need  only  be  said  that  by  the 
second  century  b.c.  no  such  thing  as  a  sober,  critical 
attitude  toward  life  in  general  and  ancient  history  in 
particular  had  as  yet  arisen  anywhere  in  the  world. 
People  were  all  too  ready  to  believe  marvelous  and 
miraculous  tales  without  asking  for  credentials.  The 
passion  for  accuracy  and  for  fidelity  to  fact  so  charac¬ 
teristic  of  the  modern  historical  method  was  practically 
unknown  in  the  ancient  world.  The  “  history  ”  recorded 
by  Herodotus  is  an  excellent  illustration  of  this  lack  of 
critical  scholarship.  Nor  ought  we  to  be  surprised  at  it 
when  we  recall  the  avidity  with  which  the  European 
public  seized  upon  all  sorts  of  wild  rumors  during  the 
recent  war  and  the  popularity  and  credence  accorded 
such  stories  as  that  of  the  intervention  of  the  angelic 
bowmen  in  behalf  of  the  British  on  the  tragic  retreat 
from  Mons. 

213.  The  idealism  of  the  apocalyptic  writers. — The 
second  question  is  not  so  easily  answered.  Of  course, 


316  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  writers  of  these  apocalyptic  visions  expected  them 
to  be  taken  at  their  face  value.  There  would  have  been 
no  point  in  telling  such  tales  if  they  had  not  expected  and 
intended  them  to  be  believed.  But  more  than  that, 
they  must  have  believed  their  tales  themselves.  They 
were  men  of  high  moral  character  and  devoted  to  the 
defense  of  lofty  spiritual  and  moral  ideals.  They  were 
willing  and  ready  to  die  if  need  be  for  their  principles. 
It  is  inconceivable  that  they  should  have  been  anything 
less  than  wholeheartedly  sincere  in  their  statements. 
They  were  not  trying  to  “put  over”  upon  their  con¬ 
temporaries  what  they  themselves  knew  to  be  a  tissue 
of  lies.  They  believed  in  themselves  and  in  their  mes¬ 
sage.  How  could  they?  Many  elements  enter  into 
the  answer  to  this  question;  and,  of  course,  the  explana¬ 
tion  would  not  be  the  same  in  every  individual  case. 
At  least,  the  proportions  of  the  ingredients  of  the  answer 
would  vary  with  the  individual.  But  the  main  forma¬ 
tive  factors  may  be  stated.  The  lack  of  a  keenly  critical 
spirit  in  that  generation  has  already  been  mentioned. 
This  means  that  the  lines  between  fact  and  fiction  were 
not  sharply  drawn.  The  primary  interest  of  these 
writers  was  not  to  discover  actual  facts  and  to  discrimi¬ 
nate  clearly  between  truth  and  error;  it  was  rather  to 
edify  and  stimulate  their  readers  to  deeds  and  lives  of 
heroism  in  behalf  of  their  faith.  Their  first  question, 
therefore,  was  not,  “Is  it  true?”  but  “Will  it  serve  my 
purpose  ?”  Moreover,  these  writers  were  the  exponents 
and  champions  of  a  highly  idealistic  interpretation  of 
life  and  of  the  universe.  Their  whole  being  was  wrapped 
up  in  their  ideals;  and  ideals  were  immeasurably  dearer 
to  them  than  cold-blooded  facts.  It  is  always  easy  for 


A  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE 


317 


the  genuine  idealist  to  transcend  facts ;  and  this  indiffer¬ 
ence  to  reality  is  always  the  greatest  peril  of  idealism. 
Still  further,  these  writers  were  endowed  with  rich  and 
fertile  imaginative  powers.  To  these  they  gave  loose 
rein.  They  roamed  at  will  in  the  realms  of  the  unreal 
and  the  fantastic  and  added  to  their  store  of  materials 
much  that  was  produced  by  their  own  creative  imagina¬ 
tions.  Furthermore,  the  apocalyptists  carried  on  to  an 
even  greater  intensity  the  old  prophetic  belief  in  a 
supernaturalistic  universe.  They  substituted  super¬ 
naturalism  for  natural  law.  In  a  very  real  sense,  the 
supernatural  was  for  them  the  natural  thing.  The 
Supernatural  Person  in  control  of  the  universe  was 
free  to  express  himself  as  he  would.  He  was  bound  by 
no  laws  of  matter  or  energy.  In  such  a  world  the 
extraordinary  is  taken  for  granted.  It  is  a  matter  of 
course.  There  is  nothing  inherently  incredible.  When 
we  add  to  these  things  a  profoundly  emotional  nature 
coupled  with  a  mystical  temperament,  we  get  a  com¬ 
bination  that  represents  the  personality  of  a  saintly 
seer.  Such  a  man  brooding  over  the  problem  of  the 
world  and  communing  with  his  own  inner  spirit  in  dark 
and  solitary  places  would  easily  become  the  victim  of  a 
kind  of  self-hypnosis  which  would  render  him  incapable 
of  distinguishing  clearly  between  the  fermentations  of 
his  own  mind  and  the  product  of  a  divine  revelation. 
He  longs  for  a  word  from  God  and  the  word  comes.  He 
does  not  dream  of  questioning  its  authenticity  or  author¬ 
ity.  Parallel  cases  in  modern  times  are  represented  by 
the  names  of  Joseph  Smith,  the  founder  of  the  Mormon 
movement;  Mrs.  Eddy,  the  mother  of  the  Christian 
Science  community;  and  John  Alexander  Dowie,  the 


3iS  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


father  of  Zionism.  These  and  others  of  the  same  sort 
are  not  to  be  thought  of  as  unmitigated  frauds;  they  are 
better  understood  if  regarded  as  in  large  measure,  at 
least,  sincere,  but  self-deluded.  Even  as  they  impressed 
large  numbers  of  people  with  their  spiritual  power  and 
left  vigorous  religious  groups  behind  them,  so  likewise 
the  apocalyptic  writers  found  a  large  and  devoted 
following  and  helped  the  faithful  tide  over  a  trying  period 
in  their  history. 

214.  The  moral  heroism  of  Judaism. — The  Mac- 
cabaean  revolt,  pushed  through  to  a  successful  issue 
despite  tremendous  difficulties  and  deadly  dangers,  is 
convincing  proof  of  the  underlying  moral  heroism  of  the 
loyal  Jews.  They  entitled  themselves  the  Chasidim; 
i.e.,  the  pious.  They  were  the  product  of  the  legalistic 
and  particularistic  school  of  thought  and  life,  which 
interpreted  religion  and  morals  in  extremely  strict, 
narrow,  and  pietistic  ways.  But  they  made  a  great 
contribution  to  the  history  of  humanity  by  saving  their 
religion  at  peril  of  their  lives.  This  attests  the  posses¬ 
sion  of  an  underlying  moral  stamina  that  is  beyond  all 
praise.  Such  men  made  spiritual  and  moral  values 
supreme  and  ventured  all  their  possessions  and  hopes 
in  their  defense.  “They  counted  not  their  lives  dear 
unto  themselves.”  Christianity  and  modern  Judaism 
represent  the  perpetuation  of  another  aspect  of  Jewish 
life  and  thought,  viz.,  the  universal  brotherhood  of 
such  writings  as  Ruth  and  Jonah.  But  had  not  the 
Maccabaean  saints  fought  their  good  fight,  there  would 
have  been  nothing  left  with  which  to  carry  on  the 
noble  tradition,  and  the  religious  history  of  the  world 
would  have  suffered  incalculable  loss. 


CHAPTER  XVII 


SOME  CONCLUDING  OBSERVATIONS 

215.  Morals  and  religion. — In  looking  back  over  the 
long  history  of  Hebrew  morals,  some  general  considera¬ 
tions  stand  out  clearly.  With  a  brief  statement  of 
these  we  bring  our  discussion  to  a  close.  They  need  no 
elaboration  here,  having  been  already  suggested  and 
illustrated  in  the  foregoing  historical  record. 

The  relation  between  morals  and  religion  is  every¬ 
where  evident.  Morals  cannot  be  thought  of  apart 
from  religion;  the  two  are  inseparable.  The  sanction 
and  authority  for  morals  are  always  furnished  by  religion. 
Yahweh  was  thought  of  as  the  giver  of  both  the  moral 
and  the  religious  law.  The  moral  law  was  a  part  of 
the  religious  law.  The  value  of  this  was  that  it  placed 
the  whole  power  of  religion  at  the  disposal  of  the  moral 
interests. 

216.  Morals  and  ritual. — The  two  main  elements  in 
Hebrew  religion  were  morals  and  ritual.  These  two  were 
never  congenial  partners.  In  the  early  centuries  the 
ritualistic  element  bulked  largest  in  Hebrew  religion  and 
small  room  was  left  for  ethics.  But  the  expansive  power 
of  the  moral  principle  could  not  be  kept  down,  and  in 
the  time  of  the  great  prophets  it  made  for  itself  a  large 
place.  The  notable  and  characteristic  feature  of  this 
progress  is  that  it  was  not  made  outside  of  the  scope  of 
religion  and  then  later  taken  up  by  religion  and  incorpo¬ 
rated  into  itself;  but  that  it  was  developed  within  the 
limits  of  religion  itself  in  the  name  and  under  the  auspices 

319 


320 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


of  religion.  This  moral  enrichment  was  an  achievement 
of  the  religious  spirit.  After  the  passing  of  the  prophets, 
the  ritualists  once  more  took  the  reins ;  but  the  progress 
made  under  prophetic  control  was  never  lost.  Indeed, 
the  highest  levels  of  moral  attainment  as  reflected  in 
the  literature  were  not  reached  until  later  times,  as 
appears  from  such  materials  as  Mic.  6:6-8  and  the 
Book  of  Job. 

217.  The  idea  of  God. — One  of  the  clearest  indications 
of  the  growth  of  moral  ideals  is  furnished  by  the  history 
of  the  idea  of  God.  In  the  earliest  documents,  Yahweh 
is  represented  as  inspiring  and  doing  many  things  that 
shock  our  sense  of  ethical  fitness.  He  stirs  up  David 
to  take  a  census  and  then  punishes  Israel  with  plagues 
because  the  census  was  taken.  He  hardens  Pharaoh’s 
heart  so  that  he  cannot  respond  to  proper  motives  and 
then  punishes  him  and  his  people  for  not  responding. 
He  inspires  Ahab’s  prophets  to  tell  him  a  lie,  as  a  result 
of  which  Ahab  plunges  into  war  and  meets  his  death  on 
the  battlefield.  He  favors  his  followers  even  when  they 
are  in  the  wrong  and  punishes  the  citizens  of  other 
nations  when  they  have  done  no  wrong.  He  wades 
through  blood  to  the  achievement  of  his  purposes. 
But  as  the  decades  glide  past  they  leave  more  and 
more  of  ethical  deposit  behind;  and  ultimately  all  this 
is  taken  up  by  the  God-idea  which  becomes  ethically 
rich.  Satan  comes  in  to  relieve  Yahweh  of  a  portion 
of  the  responsibility  for  the  presence  of  sin  in  human 
life.  The  idea  of  falsehood  becomes  loathsome  to 
Yahweh,  so  that  a  curse  is  pronounced  upon  everyone 
“that  loveth  and  maketh  a  lie.”  Job’s  indignation  is 
stirred  by  the  thought  that  anyone  should  dream  of 


SOME  CONCLUDING  OBSERVATIONS 


321 


flattering  God  by  saying  of  him  or  his  work  that  which 
is  not  true: 

Will  you  speak  unrighteously  for  God, 

And  talk  deceitfully  for  him  ? 

Will  you  show  him  favour  ? 

Will  you  contend  for  God  ? 

Would  it  be  good  that  he  should  search  you  out  ? 

Or  as  one  mocks  a  man  will  you  mock  him  ? 

He  will  surely  reprove  you, 

If  you  do  secretly  show  favour  [Job  13:7-10]. 

A  late  prophet  addresses  Yahweh  as  one  who  cannot 
tolerate  the  sight  of  evil: 

Thou  that  art  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  evil, 

And  that  canst  not  look  upon  wickedness  [Hab.  1:13]. 

The  terrible  and  destructive  nature  of  Yahweh  is  softened 
down  in  the  course  of  time  to  the  point  where  he  would 
rather  save  than  destroy: 

I  have  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked, 

But  that  the  wicked  turn  from  his  way  and  live; 

Turn  ye,  turn  ye  from  your  evil  ways, 

For  why  will  ye  die,  O  house  of  Israel  [Ezek.  33:11]? 

Justice  and  mercy  developed  side  by  side  among  the 
Hebrews  and  their  progress  was  constantly  reflected  in 
the  development  of  the  thought  of  God.  These  two 
principles  acted  as  mutually  corrective  agencies,  so 
that  neither  grew  to  undue  proportions  at  the  expense 
of  the  other.  It  is  a  large  part  of  the  glory  of  the 
God-idea  in  Israel  that  it  incorporated  both  justice  and 
mercy  within  itself  and  so  became  a  mighty  influence 
toward  moral  progress. 

218.  The  motive  of  the  moral  life. — The  growth  of  the 
moral  sense  in  Israel  is  revealed  again  in  the  development 


322 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


of  the  ethical  motive.  In  the  early  days7  the  motive 
was  almost  exclusively  utilitarian.  Men  were  deterred 
from  the  doing  of  evil  by  fear  of  the  consequences  in 
the  form  of  direct  chastisements  of  various  sorts  from 
Yahweh.  The  prophets  continually  urge  their  con¬ 
temporaries  on  toward  goodness  by  urging  them  to 
forsake  their  evil  ways  and  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come; 
and  by  holding  before  them  glowing  pictures  of  the 
success  and  prosperity  that  are  in  store  for  the  righteous 
people.  Nowhere  is  this  method  of  teaching  more 
clearly  and  constantly  used  than  in  the  Book  of  Deuter¬ 
onomy.  This  method  of  approach  to  the  ethical  problem 
persisted  all  through  Hebrew  history  and  is  found 
clearly  stated  over  and  over  again  in  such  books  as 
Psalms,  Proverbs,  Chronicles,  and  Daniel.  But  here 
and  there  men  were  coming  to  a  deeper  appreciation  of 
goodness.  In  Job  we  are  given  the  picture  of  a  righteous 
man  who  holds  on  to  his  integrity  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  he  fails  to  receive  the  expected  rewards  of  the 
righteous  and  on  the  contrary  is  overwhelmed  by 
fortunes  such  as  were  properly  the  lot  of  the  wicked. 
The  book  clearly  recognizes  that  external  fortune  is  by 
no  means  a  safe  guide  in  the  judgment  of  a  man’s  charac¬ 
ter.  It  is,  on  the  contrary,  the  conviction  of  its  author 
that  there  is  no  necessary  connection  between  character 
and  fortune.  The  good  man  will  persist  in  his  goodness 
even  when  it  does  not  pay  the  coveted  material  rewards. 
There  is  such  a  thing  as  disinterested  piety;  Job  is  good 
for  goodness’  sake.  The  same  advanced  attitude  toward 
the  worth  of  goodness  is  attested  by  the  Psalm  of 
Habakkuk  (3:17,  18),  a  later  supplement  to  the  Book  of 
Habakkuk.  Here  the  poet  declares  his  intention  and 


SOME  CONCLUDING  OBSERVATIONS 


323 


resolve  to  continue  in  the  path  of  piety  even  though  the 
customary  returns  for  such  a  life  are  not  forthcoming. 
The  spiritual  character  of  the  ethical  motive  is  particu¬ 
larly  noteworthy  when  we  bear  in  mind  the  fact  that 
there  was  no  generally  accepted  belief  in  a  worth-while 
life  beyond  the  grave.  It  is  measurably  easy  to  struggle 
and  endure  in  behalf  of  the  true  and  the  right,  if  such 
hard  experiences  are  softened  by  a  lively  expectation  of  a 
glory  in  the  hereafter  that  shall  help  us  to  view  the 
sufferings  of  the  present,  which  are  but  for  a  moment 
and  not  grievous,  as  not  worthy  to  be  compared  with  the 
glory  that  shall  be  hereafter.  But  a  goodness  which 
persists  through  good  report  and  ill  report,  without  any 
external  support  derived  from  a  future  hope,  is  a  type 
of  virtue  not  to  be  lightly  thought  of,  but  to  be  classed 
among  the  great  achievements  of  the  race. 

219.  The  social  aspect  of  Hebrew  morals  is  another 
thing  deserving  special  emphasis.  The  Hebrews  came 
into  Canaan  directly  from  the  nomadic  life  of  the  desert. 
In  that  stage  of  experience  the  clan  and  tribe  were  the 
controlling  forces  in  the  life  of  the  people.  The  interests 
of  each  were  in  a  very  real  sense  the  interests  of  all. 
They  all  prospered  and  suffered  together.  Upon  entering 
Canaan  the  old  clan  life  rapidly  disintegrated  under  the 
influences  of  the  economic  and  political  struggle  for 
existence  that  was  entered  upon  there.  The  old  bonds 
relaxed.  More  and  more  it  became  a  relentless  com¬ 
petitive  scramble  in  which  each  must  look  out  for  him¬ 
self;  and  woe  to  the  weakest!  Against  this  increasing 
tendency  the  great  prophets  lifted  their  voices.  They 
pleaded  earnestly  and  eloquently  the  cause  of  the  poor 
and  the  weak,  and  denounced  passionately  and  fearlessly 


324 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


the  oppression  and  extortion  practiced  by  the  rich  and 
the  strong.  Their  words  were  treasured  by  the  pious 
in  Israel  and  continue  to  be  an  inspiration  toward  social 
justice  amid  the  whirl  and  clash  of  machinery  in  our  own 
industrial  age.  This  social  interest  did  not  cease  in 
Israel  with  the  passing  of  the  prophets,  but  continued 
to  the  end,  as  is  seen  from  the  fact  that  the  pictures  of 
the  messianic  future  are  always  drawn  in  terms  of 
community  life  and  not  in  those  of  personal  and  indi¬ 
vidual  experience. 

220.  The  development  of  the  sense  of  individual  value. — - 
An  interesting  story  of  the  development  of  Hebrew 
ethics  is  the  record  of  the  rise  of  the  sense  of  individual 
worth  and  responsibility.  As  suggested  above,  the 
emphasis  in  the  nomadic  life  was  upon  the  tribal,  clan, 
and  family  interests.  This  emphasis  only  gradually 
gave  way  to  the  interests  of  the  individual  after  the 
Hebrews  entered  Canaan.  In  the  early  centuries  of 
life  in  Palestine,  it  is  a  common  thing  to  find  it  recorded 
that  the  nation  or  the  group  suffered  punishment  from 
Yahweh  for  the  sins  of  some  member  of  the  group. 
David  sins  and  Israel  suffers  the  consequences.  The 
fathers  sin  and  the  children  are  punished.  One  section 
of  Israel  goes  astray  and  all  Israel  must  pay  the  price. 
This  sense  of  the  solidarity  of  the  Hebrew  people  was  of 
inestimable  value  in  the  re-enforcement  it  brought  to 
the  claims  of  social  justice.  The  terrible  consequences 
to  the  nation  as  a  whole  of  social  sin  on  the  part  of  the 
leaders,  the  rich,  and  the  powerful  were  continually 
urged  upon  the  attention  of  the  people  by  the  great 
prophets.  But  the  forces  of  life  as  organized  in  civilized 
agricultural  and  commercial  communities  finally  brought 


SOME  CONCLUDING  OBSERVATIONS 


325 


the  individual  to  the  front  and  secured  for  him  full 
recognition.  The  specialization  that  is  a  necessary 
feature  of  civilized  life  worked  in  many  ways  toward  the 
emergence  of  individual  worth.  The  mystical  experience 
of  the  prophet  set  him  apart  from  other  men  as  a  marked 
man.  The  organization  of  the  standing  army  ignored 
clan  and  family  lines  and  was  upon  a  frankly  individual¬ 
istic  basis.  The  town  life,  with  its  arts  and  crafts,  its 
competition  in  trade  and  commerce,  and  its  inevitable 
recognition  of  exceptional  men  and  women,  worked 
effectively  to  push  the  individual  into  the  foreground. 
The  ownership  of  land  passed  rapidly  from  the  communal 
to  an  individualistic  basis.  The  great  tragedy  of  the 
Exile  finally  broke  down  completely  the  old-time  soli¬ 
darity,  in  that  the  exiles  were  not  chosen  on  the  basis  of 
clan  or  family  relationships,  but  rather  because  of  their 
influence  and  strength  as  individuals  in  the  community; 
so  that  Ezekiel,  living  among  the  exiles  in  Babylonia, 
was  the  first  to  make  a  clear  and  insistent  statement  of 
the  position  that  a  man’s  treatment  by  Yahweh  was 
determined  not  upon  the  basis  of  his  parents’  deserts, 
but  solely  in  accordance  with  his  own  merits  as  an  indi¬ 
vidual.1 

221.  Rise  of  a  world  outlook. — Closely  related  to  the 
rise  of  the  sense  of  individual  worth  and  responsibility 
was  the  corresponding  development  from  a  nationalistic 
and  particularistic  outlook  upon  life  to  a  point  of  view 
that  was  general  and  universal.  In  the  early  periods 
the  attitude  toward  foreigners  was  for  the  most  part 
one  of  hostility  and  fear.  In  no  case  did  the  Hebrew 

1  See  J.  M.  Powis  Smith,  The  Prophet  and  His  Problems  (1914),  pp. 
168-208. 


326  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


feel  any  responsibility  for  or  obligation  toward  other 
nations  or  the  members  of  such  nations.  The  Hebrew 
nation  was  the  chosen  people  of  Yahweh  who  could  be 
counted  upon  to  defend  his  own  against  all  comers. 
The  foreigner  as  such  had  no  rights  that  the  Hebrew  was 
bound  to  respect,  except  as  he  could  enforce  them  with 
his  sword.  The  great  prophets  never  really  got  away 
from  this  point  of  view  in  principle,  though  they  did 
admit  foreign  nations  into  Yahweh’s  plan  to  the  extent 
that  they  might  be  used  to  chastise  Israel  for  its  sins. 
But  as  the  power  of  Israel  declined  and  its  troubles 
multiplied,  the  idea  of  Yahweh  rapidly  expanded  from 
that  of  a  merely  national  God  to  that  of  the  God  of  the 
Universe.  Correspondingly,  the  attitude  of  the  thinker 
in  Israel  toward  the  outside  world  also  changed.  As  we 
have  seen,  the  author  of  Isaiah,  chapter  53,  interprets 
the  sufferings  of  Israel  as  having  atoning  and  redemptive 
value  for  the  world  as  a  whole.  The  old  principle  of 
national  solidarity  is  here  expanded  to  the  bursting  point 
and  made  to  include  the  nations  of  the  world  in  general. 
Israel  is  suffering,  a  part  for  the  whole,  being  indissolubly 
bound  up  in  the  divine  purpose  with  the  world  at  large. 
Such  a  recognition  of  brotherhood  among  the  nations  is 
past  all  praise  and  constitutes  an  ideal  which  is  yet  far 
from  realization.  In  similar  fashion,  we  have  seen 
Ruth  pleading  for  a  generous  attitude  toward  non- Jews; 
and  Jonah  going  so  far  as  to  make  it  the  binding  obliga¬ 
tion  of  the  Hebrew  people  to  serve  as  missionaries  of 
the  true  God  to  the  nations  of  the  world,  calling  them 
to  repentance  that  they  may  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come. 
This  breadth  of  mind  and  generosity  of  heart  did  not 
capture  the  imagi  lation  of  the  Hebrews  as  a  whole; 


SOME  CONCLUDING  OBSERVATIONS 


3  27 


but  survived  in  their  literature  as  an  inspiration  and  ideal 
for  later  centuries. 

222.  The  outstanding  characteristic  of  Hebrew  ethics 
was  evidently  its  capacity  for  growth.  There  was  little 
of  the  static  and  much  of  the  dynamic  in  it.  It  is  not 
to  be  supposed  that  the  Hebrews  were  any  less  conserv¬ 
ative  than  other  peoples.  Indeed,  tradition  was  always 
a  powerful  force  in  Israel.  Their  life-story  might  be 
written  in  terms  of  tradition  and  progress.  These  two 
principles  were  continually  at  war.  The  fact  that  there 
was  so  much  in  the  way  of  positive  progress  is  due  to 
the  experiences  through  which  the  people  passed.  Theirs 
was  a  history  of  constant  change  of  one  sort  and  another. 
They  came  in  from  the  nomadic  life  of  the  desert  to  the 
settled  agricultural  life  of  Canaan.  The  long  period  of 
settlement  in  the  new  home  and  of  adaptation  to  the 
conditions  of  the  new  manner  of  life  was  an  invaluable 
process  of  education.  The  long  wars  with  Philistia,  Syria, 
and  finally  Assyria,  continued  the  educational  process. 
Their  minds  were  kept  alert,  their  knowledge  of  the 
world  and  its  peoples  was  broadened,  and  their  own 
internal  problems  made  more  complex  and  difficult  by 
these  foreign  wars.  Then  came  the  captivity  of  Northern 
Israel  and  finally  the  exile  of  Judah.  Thereby  many 
old  ideas  and  institutions  were  shattered.  Life  had  to 
be  lived  under  a  new  set  of  conditions.  Intimate  and 
constant  contact  with  the  conquering  people  was  inevit¬ 
able.  The  life  of  Judah  was  immensely  enriched  by  this 
experience.  From  that  time  on  Judah  and  the  Jews 
were  continually  under  foreign  control  and  in  direct 
contact  with  foreign  civilizations.  Persians  followed  the 
Babylonians  and  Greeks  followed  them.  By  these 


328  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


representatives  of  two  rich  cultures  the  Jews  were  greatly- 
stirred  and  from  them  they  learned  to  good  purpose. 
Perhaps  no  nation  upon  the  face  of  the  earth  has  had 
so  long  and  so  varied  a  history  as  the  Jews.  Nor  has 
any  nation  ever  been  more  strategically  located  from 
the  point  of  view  of  its  relation  to  the  life  of  the  dominant 
nations  of  its  time.  All  the  life  of  the  ancient  Oriental 
world  passed  back  and  forth  through  Palestine.  The 
people  living  alongside  of  that  international  road  could 
not  remain  narrow  and  provincial  in  their  thought  and 
feeling.  We  may  not  be  able  to  make  precise  com¬ 
parative  measurements  of  the  moral  and  intellectual  ca¬ 
pacity  of  the  Hebrews  as  compared  with  other  peoples, 
but  it  is  clear  that  their  history  was  of  an  exceptional 
character  and  that  the  forces  by  which  they  were  tossed 
about,  in  bringing  them  violently  into  contact  with  many 
and  various  phases  of  world-thought  and  life,  contrib¬ 
uted  heavily  to  their  progress  in  mind  and  heart.  They 
were  the  fortunate  victims  of  circumstances.  Their 
course  in  education  was  not  by  any  means  an  easy  one; 
but  by  hard  experiences  they  learned  hard  lessons  and 
at  the  price  of  suffering  they  achieved  a  degree  of  moral 
excellence  that  still  challenges  the  admiration  of  men. 


INDEX 


Aaron,  299 
Abednego,  307  f. 

Abel,  42 
Abihu,  299 
Abijah,  293 
Abimelech,  19 
Abner,  16 

Abomination,  of  desolation,  304 
Abraham,  3  f.,  31,  37  f.,  293 
Absalom,  8 
Achan, 36 

Adultery,  85,  131,  171,  178,  182, 
195,  197,  215,  249 

Aged,  attitude  toward,  251 
Ahab,  320 
Ahasuerus,  306 

Alexander,  conquest  by,  231  f.,  279 
Almsgiving,  252 
Altar,  Greek,  304 
Altruism,  259,  289 
Amaziah,  295  f. 

Ammon,  37 
Ammonites,  295 

Amos,  73  ff.;  certainty  of,  75; 
message  of,  77  f.,  83;  times  of, 
73  f- 

Ancestor  worship,  46 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  262,  302  f. 
Aphorisms,  oriental,  245 
Apocalyptic  writings,  309  f. 

Arabs,  295 
Armageddon,  175 
Arrogance,  230,  249 

Assouan,  papyri,  207  ff.;  colony 
at,  234 

Assyrians,  245 
Asylum,  right  of,  140 


Atheism,  233  f. 

Authority,  28  f.,  263 

Babylonia,  influence  of,  209  f. 
Bargains,  hard,  298 
Bathsheba,  16  f.,  301 

Bibliography,  154,  164,  170,  180, 
184,  188,  192,  196,  198,  202,  203, 
207,  232,  245,  262,  264  f.,  279, 
280,  289,  305,  307 
Birth,  new,  179  f. 

Blood-revenge,  42,  85,  140,  298 
Bloodshed,  19  f.,  92,  230 
Bolshevism,  93 
Borrower,  55,  262 
Bravery,  70 

Bribery,  61,  81,  92,  171,  212  f., 
230,  250,  298 

Brotherhood,  international,  326 
Budde,  63  ff. 

Burglary,  86 

Cain,  42 

Canaan,  son  of  Noah,  46 

Canticles,  message  of ,  289  f.;  value 
of,  290  f. 

Capital  punishment,  52,  58,  59, 
126,  131,  134,  139,  182,  299 

Captives,  300 
Caution,  258 
Census,  David’s,  301 
Character,  79  f.,  259 
Charity,  45,  252,  256 
Cheating,  43,  46,  81,  139,  184 
Children,  113,  134,  181,  254,  324 
Chivalry,  17 
Christianity,  318 
Chronicler,  the,  199 


33i 


332 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Chronicles,  Books  of,  292  f. 
Circumcision,  303 

Code,  Deuteronomic,  1 23  f. ;  ethics 
of,  124 

Codes,  growth  of  49  ff.;  of  law, 
146  ff. 

Community,  Jewish,  221 
Consciousness,  moral,  29 
Contentment,  252 

Contracts,  business,  209  ff.;  mar¬ 
riage,  216;  validity  of,  85 

Corruption,  92 
Courage,  23  f. 

Covenant  code,  49  f.,  63,  83 
Criticism,  315  f. 

Cunning,  250 
“Cure  of  Souls,”  177  f. 

Curse,  9  f.,  267,  320 
Cursing  of  parents,  250 
Cyrus,  152,  163 

Damages,  55 

Daniel,  304,  322;  Book  of,  307  ff. 
Daughters,  255 

David,  8,  12  f.,  14  f.,  18  ff.,  25  ff., 
293,  297,  301,320,  324;  will  of,  21 

Death,  48,  158,  223,  260  f.,  272, 
282,  284  ff.,  299;  life  after, 
273  f.;  penalty  of,  186 
Debauchery,  92  f. 

Debts,  137;  release  of,  200  f. 
Decalogue,  49  f.,  62  f.,  130 

Deceit,  20  f.,  43,  85,  212  f.,  229, 
250,  266 

Defectives,  183 
Deutero-Isaiah,  149  ff. 
Deuteronomy,  123  f.,  141  f.,  322 
Dishonesty,  209 
Disillusionment,  187 
Divorce,  131  f.,  194  f.,  294 
Dowie,  John  A.,  317 

Drunkenness,  22  f.,  43,  82,  85,  92, 
249  f. 


Ecclesiastes,  278  f.;  Book  of,  246 
Economic  motives,  142;  situation, 
5,  84,  92,  187  f. 

Eddy,  Mrs.,  317 

Edom,  126,  193  f.,  254,  294 

Education,  327  f. 

Elephantine,  207 
Elihu,  276  f. 

Eliphaz,  270  ff. 

Enoch,  Book  of,  310  f. 
Environment,  change  of,  5;  influ¬ 
ence  of,  s 
Envy,  248 
Epicureans,  279 
Esther,  304  f. 

Ethics,  and  religion,  247;  and 
ritual,  179,  186;  best,  239,  244 
Eunuchs,  197  f. 

Evil,  nature  of,  47  f. 

Exhortations,  145 
Exile,  186,  297 
Exiles,  situation  of,  149 
Expiation,  140 
Extravagance,  249  f. 

Ezekiel,  170  ff.,  198 
Ezra,  292,  294 

Fact,  and  fiction,  316 
Faith,  239,  241 

Faithfulness,  86,  106 
Fall,  story  of,  34  f. 

Fallow-land,  61 
Falsehood,  197,  320 
False  measures,  139,171;  weights, 
81,  86,  139,  171 

Family,  254 

Fathers,  and  children,  324 
Fear,  186 

First-born,  rights  of,  134;  sacri¬ 
fice  of,  52 
Flattery,  250 
Flood,  297 


INDEX 


333 


Foreigners,  attitude  toward,  n  ff., 
32  f.,  38  ff.,  83,  ioi  ff.,  126, 
129  f.,  135,  137,  162,  175,  178  f., 
194  f.,  197  f.,  199,  200,  202  f ., 
2Ilf.,  243,  253  f.,  294  f.,  306  f., 
325  f- 

Fratricide,  42 

Friendship,  26,  70,  251,  253,  262 
Frugality,  251 
Funds,  trust,  298 

Gambling,  250 

Generosity,  23!.,  178,  238,  252, 
256 

God,  conception  of,  51  f.,  98, 

124  f.,  139,  320  f.;  goodness  of, 
150  f. 

Golden  Age,  168 
Grace,  divine,  126 
Grain,  hoarding  of,  250 
Gray,  G.  B.,  274 
Greece,  philosophy  of,  232 
Greed,  197,  248 
Grudges,  184 
Gymnasium,  303 

Habakkuk,  105  f.;  contribution 
of,  107  f. 

Haggai,  188  ff. 

Haman,  305  f. 

Hammurabi,  code  of,  53,  140, 
146  ff. 

Hannah,  18,  22 

Harlotry,  85,  182,  197,  215,  249 
Hatred,  249,  307 
Hearts,  new,  180 
Heaven,  Queen  of,  121  f. 
Hellenization,  231  f.,  279,  303  f. 
Heraclides,  280 
Heresy,  278 
Heroism,  moral,  318 
Hezekiah,  296 
History,  value  of,  300 
Holiness-code,  181  ff. 


Holiness,  idea  of,  52,  95 

Homicide,  accidental,  53,  140,  298 

Honesty,  266 

Honor,  297 

Hope,  future,  174  f. 

Hosea,  73  ff.;  marriage  of,  87  s.; 

message  of,  85  ff. 

Hospitality,  25,  45,  266 
Humanitarianism,  116,  136 
Humanity,  despair  of,  312 
Humility,  197 
Humor,  258 

Hypocrisy,  229  f.,  250,  261 
I,  in  Psalter,  221 

Idealism,  80  f.,  115,  156,  168,  219 

Ideals,  241  f.,  267;  social,  96ff.> 
98  f.,  in  f . ;  moral,  261,  312; 
3r5  f- 

Idolatry,  150  ff. 

Impartiality,  184 
Imprecatory  Psalms,  212,  222  ff. 

Individual,  68;  responsibility  of, 
128  f.,  250,  269,  289;  worth  of, 
116,  324  f. 

Industry,  251,  256,  283 
Inheritance,  294 
Injuries,  personal,  59  f.,  140  f. 
Insanity,  89 

Insight,  moral,  61  f.,  300 
Insincerity,  266 
Integrity,  238,  261,  273 

Interest,  on  loans,  129,  137,  183, 
217  f.,  238,  250;  social,  288  f. 

Investments,  285 
Isaac,  31,  41  f. 

Isaiah,  73  ff.;  call  of,  95;  chapter 
53,  156  ff.;  message  of,  90  ff.; 
chapters  56-66,  196  ff. 

Israel,  Northern,  295  f.;  as  chosen 
people,  125  f.;  duty  of,  126  f. 

Jacob,  3  f.,  31,  42  f. 

Jael,  12 


334 


THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Jason,  303 
Jehoiada,  297 
Jephthah,  9,  18 

Jeremiah,  104  ff.,  119  f.;  vengeance 
of,  1 19 

Jesuitical  reasoning,  10  f. 

Jesus,  143 

Jesus,  ben  Sirach,  246 
Jews,  morale  of,  99 
Joab,  19  f. 

Joash,  293,  297 
Job,  Book  of,  264,  320,  322 
Jokes,  practical,  258 
Jonah,  203  ff.,  296,  326 
Jonathan,  9  f.,  21,  26 
Joseph,  46  f. 

Joshua,  37 
Joy,  260 

Jubilee,  year  of,  182,  184  f. 
Judaism,  spirit  of,  167  ff.,  219 
Judges,  298 

Justice,  26  ff.,  61,  81  f.,  86,  138  f., 
178,  184,  197,  209,  215  f.,  223, 
252  f.,  266,  298,  321,  324 

Kenite,  hypothesis,  63  ff. 

Kenites,  63  ff. 

Kindness,  251 
Knowledge,  298 

Landmarks,  86,  141 
Law,  consuetudinary,  49;  moral, 
259  f.,  298,  300,  319;  origin  of, 
49  ff- 

Laws,  dietary,  307 
Laziness,  197,  250 
Legalism,  179,  292  ff.,  301 
Legislation,  unreality  of,  185 
Levirate  marriage,  132  f. 

Levites,  183 

Lex  talionis,  58,  101,  139,  184,  262 

Life,  brevity  of,  228  f. ;  future, 
224  ff.,  313  k,  323;  length  of, 
239,  297;  a  riddle,  285 


Loans,  interest  on,  217  f. 

Lot,  45 

Love,  69,  249,  261,  277,  290; 
law  of,  186 

Loving-kindness,  86 
Lust,  59,  182 

Lying,  20  f.,  43,  52,  54,  85,  118, 
184,  229,  249,  298 

Magic,  34 

Magnanimity,  24  f.,  44 
Maccabean  revolt,  303  f. 

Malachi,  192-96 

Man,  the  ideal,  178;  worth  of, 
227  f. 

Man-stealing,  135 
Materialism,  186,  198,  314 
Matricide,  59 
Mattathias,  304 
Measures,  false,  250 
Meekness,  238 
Melancholy,  260 
Menelaus,  303 
Mercy,  85  f.,  251,  321 
Meshach,  307  f. 

Messianic  state,  179,  180,  187  ff., 
191  f.,  324 

Method,  historical,  315  f. 

Micah,  prophet,  73  ff.;  message  of, 
96  ff. 

Micah,  of  Ephraim,  10,  n 
Missionary,  spirit  of,  206 
Mizpah  benediction,  39 
Moab,  37 
Moabites,  295 
Moderation,  284 

Monotheism,  76  f.,  162,  234,  314, 
326 

Morals,  and  religion,  vii,  137  f., 
319;  pragmatic,  258;  social 
aspect  of,  323  f.;  and  ritual,  86, 
300,  319  f. 

Mordecai,  305  f. 

Mortgage,  214,  217  ff. 


INDEX 


335 


Mosaic  code,  145  ff. 

Moses,  3  f.,  31  ff.,  35,  39,  41,  47, 
127,  141,  299 

Mother,  love  of,  46 

Motives,  moral,  143  f.,  186,  241  f., 
267  f.,  321  f. 

Murder,  85,  140,  171,  184,  197,  231 
Mysticism,  242,  325 

Naboth,  27 
Nadab,  299 
Nahum,  103 
Nash  papyrus,  49 
Nature,  human,  263,  270  f. 

Needy,  the,  183 

Nehemiah,  192,  199  f.,  297  f.;  con¬ 
duct  of,  201 

Nineveh,  203  ff. 

Noah,  31 

Oaths,  9  f.,  216,  298;  false,  229 
Obadiah,  194 

Odium  theologicum,  171  f.,  231 
Old  Testament,  nature  of,  208  f. 
Onias,  303 

Oppression,  230,  250,  298,  323  f. 
Ordeal,  52  f.,  54,  293 
Order,  moral,  282 
Orphans,  266 

Orthodoxy,  243,  246,  268  f.,  275, 
278,  292 

P,  document,  292 
Pain,  277 

Parents,  134,  181  f. 

Parsimony,  250 
Particularism,  167,  200,  296 
Passover,  299 
Patricide,  59 
Pekah,  296 
Penalties,  death,  300 
Penitence,  262 
Perjury,  85,  195,  197 


Personality,  rights  of,  130  f.,  143, 
176,  300 

Perspective,  historical,  288 
Pessimism,  260 

Pharaoh,  32  f.,  320;  heart- 

hardened,  101 

Pharisaism,  301 
Philanthropy,  197 
Philistia,  254 
Philistine,  295 

Philosophy,  moral,  86,  108,  142  f., 
193;  Greek,  280 

Piety  and  prosperity,  44,  79,  82, 
86,  95  f.,  1 21  f .,  144  f.,  150, 
175  ff.,  189,  198,  223,  241,  247  f., 
258  f.,  265  ff.,  297,  322  f. 

Piety,  commercialized,  268;  nar¬ 
row,  243 

Pious,  234  ff. 

Plagiarism,  148 
Pledges,  61,  81,  138 
Poetry,  best  Hebrew,  220 
Polygamy,  15,  45,  57,  69,  182,  293 
Poor,  and  weak,  60  f.,  69  f.,  81  f., 
91  f.,  114  f.,  136  f.,  171, 195,  235, 

323  f- 

Poor-relief,  183 
Poverty,  extremes  of,  258 
Prayer,  94,  198,  308  f. 

Prediction,  argument  from,  150  f. 
Privilege,  special,  78  f. 

Progress,  moral,  40,  67  f.,  319  f., 
327;  social,  289 

Prohibition,  249 
Property  interests,  294 
Prophecy,  69 

Prophets,  false,  102  f.,  171;  homi¬ 
letics  of,  90,  99;  influence  of, 
141  f.;  practicality  of,  115; 
psychology  of,  89 

Prosperity  and  piety,  44,  79,  82, 
86,  95  f.,  1 21  f.,  144  f.,  174  f., 
189,  198,  201,  223,  241,  247  f., 
258  f.,  2655.,  267  f.,  297,  322  f. 

Prostitution,  23 


336  THE  MORAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HEBREWS 


Proverbs,  Book  of,  245,  322 
Psalter,  as  hymnbook,  220,  322 

Punishment,  capital,  186;  cor¬ 
poral,  254 

Purity,  of  speech,  261 

Qoheleth,  278  f.;  challenge  of, 
286;  opinions  of,  281  ff.;  contri¬ 
bution  of,  286  f . ;  outlook  of, 
287  f. 

Redemption,  of  land,  185 
Reform,  under  Nehemiah,  199  f. 
Refuge,  cities  of,  140,  298 
Rehoboam,  293 

Religion,  and  morals,  vii,  137  f., 
247,  319;  and  ritual,  79  f.,  93  ff., 
168;  popular,  77 

Responsibility,  of  individual,  176  f. 
Restitution,  54 
Resurrection,  314 
Revenge,  297,  309;  blood,  298 
Reverence,  for  parents,  70,  178, 

251 

Riches,  261,  297;  extremes  of,  258; 

trust  in,  266 
Right,  meaning  of,  155 

Righteousness,  38,  81  f.,  86,  95  f., 
197,  242,  248  f.,  252  f.,  266, 
298;  meaning  of,  153,  196; 
vicarious,  174 

Rights,  of  persons,  53,  56,  57,  59, 
60;  of  property,  53,  216; 

human,  78,  108,  183 

Ritual,  298  f.;  and  morals,  86, 
1 10  f 179,  186,  292,  300,  319!.; 
and  religion,  79  f.,  94  f.,  168,  194 

Robbery,  171,  250,  298 
Ruth,  201  f.,  296,  326 

Sabbath,  136,  197,  201,  299,  303  f. 
Sabbatical  year,  185 

Sacrifice,  304;  human,  37  f.,  112  f., 
172,  197 

Sadika  marriage,  16 


Samaritans,  254,  295  f. 

Samson,  16,  245 
Samuel,  9,  26 
Satan,  173,  267,  301,  320 
Saul,  9,  11,  14,  24 
Self-sacrifice,  47 
Semites,  222 
Sensuality,  81  f.,  17 1 
Sensuousness,  197 
Sermon,  on  the  Mount,  262 

Servant-Songs,  153  ff.;  contribu¬ 
tion  of,  160 

Settlement  in  Canaan,  4 

Sex,  relations  of,  130,  181  f.,  214  f. 

Sexual  indulgence,  43,  59,  82,  117, 
126,  131,  132,  266 

Shadrach,  307  f. 

Sheol,  223,  225,  272,  285,  311 
Sin,  origin  of,  173 
Sinai,  67  f. 

Sincerity,  316 

Sinners,  229  f.,  262 

Sins,  secret,  266 

Slander,  171,  184,  197,  230,  249 

Slave,  value  of,  57  f. 

Slavery,  56®.,  81,  114,  130,  134  f., 
182  f.,  266.  300 

Slaves,  release  of,  114,  134  f.,  182, 
185 

Smith,  Joseph,  317 

Social:  interests,  68;  order,  83; 
rights,  60;  unity,  6 

Sociology,  250 
Sodomy,  117,  182 

Solidarity,  social,  13  ff.,  127  ff., 
160  ff.,  176,  269,  309,  324  f. 

Solomon,  8,  12,  15,  297 
Sorcery,  59,  195,  197 
Sorrow,  260,  286 
Spirit,  historical,  314  f. 

Spirits,  fear  of,  140 
Standard,  of  weights  and  meas¬ 
ures,  217 


INDEX 


33  7 


Stoics,  184,  280 
Strangers,  60,  183,  185 

Suffering,  in  Babylonia,  264;  in 
Egypt,  264;  problem  of,  109, 
152  ff.,  170  f.,  189,  221  f.,  248, 
264  ff.,  326;  views  of,  269  f. 

Suicide,  20 
Sun-god,  196 

Supernaturalism,  169  f.,  317 
Swearing,  false,  184 
Sympathy,  277 

Tamar,  301 
Tammuz,  290 

Temple,  building  of,  189  f.;  of 
Assuan,  207  f.,  212  f. 

Theft,  42,  53  f.,  85,  178,  184,  197 
Thought,  freedom  of,  107 
Tithe,  137,  195  f. 

Tradition,  9;  force  of,  327 
Trustees,  54 
Truth,  85,  251,  263 
Truthfulness,  70,  119,  197,  209 

Unclean,  299 

Universalism,  202  ff.,  205  f. 

Universe,  moral,  310;  predeter¬ 
mined,  282,  284 

Unwitting  sins,  299 
Usury,  171,  178 

Utilitarianism,  viii,  120  f.,  258,  322 

Vashti,  305 
Vengeance,  108,  184 

Vicarious  atonement,  127;  right¬ 
eousness,  1 16 

Vindictiveness,  112 
Virtues,  43  f.,  68,  70,  120,  142  f., 
144,  248  f.,  250  f.,  266 


Vows,  9  f.,  127,  293 

Wages,  payment  of,  138,  183 
Weak,  and  poor,  136  f.,  235,  323  f. 
Wealth,  258,  261,  266,  283 
Weights,  and  measures,  184 
Weights,  false,  250 
Wickedness,  248  f.;  dynamic,  230 
Widows,  138,  266;  vow  of,  294 
Wife,  ideal,  251 

Wisdom,  247,  261,  298;  character¬ 
istics  of,  257 
Witness,  false,  249 
Witnesses,  139 
Witches,  52 
Wives,  255  f. 

Woman,  attitude  toward,  15  ff., 
40  ff.,  130  ff.,  181  f.,  213  ff.,  219, 
249,  271,  290  f.,  293  f.,  305;  love 
for,  42,  45;  rights  of,  58,  69, 
213  f. 

Women,  sensuality  of,  81  f.,  92; 
value  of,  293;  vow  of,  293  f.; 
volubility  of,  256 

World  outlook,  325 
World-view,  162  f. 

Yahu,  consorts  of,  214  f. 

Yahweh,  anger  of,  35  f.;  bloody 
deeds  of,  8f.;  Day  of,  75  f.; 
integrity  of,  n;  love  of,  152, 
194;  mercy  of,  128;  morals  of, 
7  f.,  31  ff.,  109  ff.,  173  f.;  right¬ 
eousness  of,  153  f. 

Zechariah,  188  ff.,  190  f.;  chap¬ 
ters  9-14,  198  ff. 

Zephaniah,  hi  f. 

Zerubbabel,  189  f. 

Zophar,  271  ff. 


PRINTED  IN  THE  U.S.A. 


. 


i 


